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.

(Sly Oyster)   Twenty years ago Art Spiegelman drew an ironic cover of kids walking into school with guns. Now? "My wish for 2013: let Newtown be remembered as the turning point-I'm hoping that kids with guns can become ironic again"   (slyoyster.com) divider line 234
    More: Sad, Art Spiegelman  
•       •       •

18235 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jan 2013 at 1:29 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-11 02:28:11 PM
Remember when the hall monitor in Funky Winkerbean had a chain gun?
 
2013-01-11 02:31:05 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Frank N Stein: jaytkay: An armed society is a polite society. Like the south side of Chicago, for example.

Well, when you have measures the prohibit poor people from legally purchasing guns, that leaves only the cops and bad guys (sometimes there's little distinction between to two) who own firearms.

Why do you support prohibiting poor black people from legally purchasing firearms?

/South Side resident, BTW

See? The only solution to gun violence is guns. Why can't people understand that?

If you're not living with a deadly weapon perpetually strapped to your side and a gnawing suspicion of everyone around you in the back of your brain, you're just not free. That feeling of paranoia is just there to let you know the second amendment is working as intended!

Hooray freedumb!


Except you are not actually against guns. You also want guns around to save your ass from violence. You just want relatively fewer of them in the hands of the group "all humans", and more in the hands of the administrators who brought us the presidency of George W Bush, because you find them more trustworthy.
 
2013-01-11 02:31:19 PM

neversubmit: I wish you right and that young whipper snapper was full of it however... School shooting


Looking over that (admittedly quickly) it appears that the school shooting incidents increased in the 90's. There really were not that many - again, relative to now. Looks like 16 total in the 70's and 80's and then over 16 in the first half of the 90's alone.


moothemagiccow: So how many people were murdered in your hometown high school last year?


Zero. In all the years prior, zero. But of course, we've got a zero tolerance on anything at all now (even guns in trunks).
 
2013-01-11 02:31:36 PM

JesseL: stuffy: I've said it before. The only way your going to get people to give up guns, is to make them feel that they don't need them.

How would you propose doing that?


Prozium

t1.gstatic.com
 
2013-01-11 02:32:39 PM
Fear of ducks page with Aflac duck pop up... meet your competition for most ironic ad placement.
i149.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-11 02:33:18 PM

GanjSmokr: moothemagiccow: So how many people were murdered in your hometown high school last year?

Zero. In all the years prior, zero. But of course, we've got a zero tolerance on anything at all now (even guns in trunks).


So, basically zero tolerance is the equivalent of Lisa's Magic Rock.
 
2013-01-11 02:33:19 PM
Nothing good will happen until the ACLU gets shut down and the nutjobs get locked up. I know you can make plastique out of salt and petroleum jelly and samurai swords sell for under $30 and if you locked yourself in a room full of 6 year olds and a twenty something education major there wouldn't be anything there to stop a maniac like Holmes or Loughner or Lanza. If you went with the plastique you wouldn't even have to get inside the school.
 
2013-01-11 02:35:15 PM

Frank N Stein: jaytkay: An armed society is a polite society. Like the south side of Chicago, for example.

Well, when you have measures the prohibit poor people from legally purchasing guns, that leaves only the cops and bad guys (sometimes there's little distinction between to two) who own firearms.

Why do you support prohibiting poor black people from legally purchasing firearms?

/South Side resident, BTW


The South and West sides have most of the guns in Chicago. And most of the crime.

Why haven't all those guns removed crime? Is Chicago somehow exempt from the Laws of Conservative Reality?
 
2013-01-11 02:35:55 PM

dittybopper: GanjSmokr: moothemagiccow: So how many people were murdered in your hometown high school last year?

Zero. In all the years prior, zero. But of course, we've got a zero tolerance on anything at all now (even guns in trunks).

So, basically zero tolerance is the equivalent of Lisa's Magic Rock.



evergreenterrace.com.au
Exactly :)
 
2013-01-11 02:36:43 PM
Honest Bender, I couldn't see your pic but I thought the same thing.

www.ehl.icrc.org
 
2013-01-11 02:37:19 PM

stuffy: I've said it before. The only way your going to get people to give up guns, is to make them feel that they don't need them.


And how is life in magical fairy land where no crime exists and all men are peaceful always?

Captain Darling: Yes life was better in 1993 when nobody had access to guns and hence schools were safe from them.


No, my sarcasm detector isn't broken. But how Spiegelman comes up with the idea that the cover was "ironic" in '93 eludes me. A sampling of events in 1993:

--Mir Aimal Kasi fires a rifle and kills two employees outside CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
--Two-year-old James Bulger is abducted, tortured and murdered by two 10-year-old boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.
--World Trade Center bombing: In New York, New York, a van bomb parked below the North Tower of the World Trade Center explodes, killing six and injuring over 1,000.
--Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agents raid the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, with a warrant to arrest leader David Koresh on federal firearms violations. Four agents and five Davidians die in the raid and a 51-day standoff begins. It ends with a fire that kills 76 people, including David Koresh. 
--The Kuwaiti government claims to uncover an Iraqi assassination plot against former U.S. President George Bush shortly after his visit to Kuwait. Two Iraqi nationals confess to driving a car-bomb into Kuwait on behalf of the Iraqi Intelligence Service. (Thus, our reason for attacking Iraq, as stated by G. W. Bush when he said, "That guy tried to kill my dad!") The US response, four months later, is to bomb the shiat out of Baghdad. (And to invade ten years later even though it was well known that the primary leaders of al Qaeda were hiding in Afghanistan and Pakistan, along the mountainous border region between those two nations).
--In Manassas, Virginia, Lorena Bobbitt cuts off the penis of her husband John Wayne Bobbitt.
--A Unabomber bomb injures computer scientist David Gelernter at Yale University.
--Colin Ferguson opens fire with his Ruger 9 mm pistol on a Long Island Rail Road train, killing 6 and injuring 19.

Of the incidents listed, only three include the use of firearms, true enough. But they're major enough to be included on a list of events for 1993 twenty years later. Conversely, the list proves rather effectively that one doesn't require firearms in order to kill or maim (a point I make often enough). As someone said upthread, people are going to kill/hurt other people--some of us humans really are quite unpleasant creatures. Just hope it's not someone you care about, or, alternately, hope that one of us who has both self control and a weapon is there to protect your loved one when the Sideshow Bobs of the world show up.
 
2013-01-11 02:37:35 PM

MythDragon: All these discussions about guns have made me realise I am wrong. We *SHOULD* ban hi capacity clips. There is no reason ANYONE needs a clip that holds more than 10 rounds. So I am now in favor of getting rid of all hi-capacity clips, and I vow before Fark, that I will not use a clip that holds more than 10 rounds for any of my guns.

[www.m1-garand-rifle.com image 437x374][encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 289x174]
^ Clip


"Hurr, durr, somebody doesn't understand the difference between a clip and a magazine."

Therefore GUNS!!!! Case CLOSE!!!!11!!
 
2013-01-11 02:38:02 PM

muck4doo: kbronsito: So hipsters should buy guns for their children?

Hipsters are cool with stripping away your rights, as long as a Democrat is doing it.


it's getting tiresome.  You know tiresome like keeping track of the dead and wounded children, tiresome.
 
2013-01-11 02:38:23 PM

GanjSmokr: dittybopper: GanjSmokr: moothemagiccow: So how many people were murdered in your hometown high school last year?

Zero. In all the years prior, zero. But of course, we've got a zero tolerance on anything at all now (even guns in trunks).

So, basically zero tolerance is the equivalent of Lisa's Magic Rock.


[evergreenterrace.com.au image 500x333]
Exactly :)


The existence of gun racks in the parking lot = 0 school shootings is equally specious though I think I'll regret pointing this out.
 
2013-01-11 02:38:43 PM

chaos731: Your work on Maus alone elevates you to one of our most important literary figures, all hyperbole aside.


I thought you said "hyperbole aside"?

Spiegelman is not bad, but in no way, shape or form is he a "most" important literary figure. Noteworthy, of course. Influential, certainly. And while I am very happy to see his elevation of sequential art as a viable medium for serious work, it is not helpful to over-state his talents.

/your mileage, of course, may vary.
 
2013-01-11 02:38:55 PM

Rapmaster2000: RickN99: FTA: . It doesn't seem so far removed from the rhetoric being spewed by the gun lobby in the wake of the Newtown massacre.

Right. The NRA recommends armed police in the schools -- that's not far at all from letting elementary school kids bring their own guns.

It made me wonder how familiar people are with police staffing levels in their community.  For example, the small town where I grew up had a total of five schools (3 grade, 1 middle, 1 high) and a total of ten cops.   So, they would need to increase their staffing levels by at least 50%.

My current county has 125 schools and 1269 cops, so it's roughly at the same level of staffing.  How much are taxpayers willing to pay to make this police idea happen?


All you have to do to pay for it is cut taxes on the wealthy.

\ta-da!
 
2013-01-11 02:40:14 PM

Carn: Sticky Hands: neversubmit: When I was a kid I had a pump .22 and after a heavy rain I'd go to the wash out behind the pond and kill snakes so the cows would go to the high pasture. Then kids would trade punches, the shake and call it good. Today they talk shiat and pull guns.


Unless you were a kid in the 1950s or a couple of years in the 1960 that's simply not true.
since that was that last time the murder rate was this low (4.7) and the lowest in that era was 4.0 in 1957. ( FBI stats, feel free to check 'em out)

to go any lower than that you would have to go all the way back to 1910.

Simply put the argument that more guns leads to more crime is not supported by the data which shows that we have more guns than ever before, and we are approaching the lowest overall crime rates in a century

That probably has nothing to do with our record incarceration rates, no? Also, being number one in the world in gun murders per capita, we should be proud of that too right?


It might, it might not, it might have to do with massive amounts of cheap entertainment that keep angry young men off the streets. It might have to do with legalized abortion, it might have to do with the banning of leaded gas.

however, what we DO know is the following: states with less strict gun control have lower firearm murder rates than states with more strict gun control.

and: There are more guns in the USA now than ever before, and it is likely that there are more guns that people in the USA. Yet the murder rate is declining, and across the country as a whole the gun murder rate has held steady at about ~75% of all homicides.

Those are right in line with Switzerland for percentage of murders committed by firearms.

But they have a murder rate of 0.7 which is a little more that half the rate of the unarmed UK.
 
2013-01-11 02:40:33 PM

dittybopper: Kids with guns? I'm doing my part:

[i47.tinypic.com image 225x319]

Of course, we have a back-up plan, just in case:

[i46.tinypic.com image 480x640]


I don't think you should put those blindfolds on your kids when they're handling dangerous weapons...
 
2013-01-11 02:41:55 PM

Lollipop165: T.rex: In addition the highly acclaimed Maus I and II, Spieglman is also the guy who created the Garbage Pail Kids.

[www.igorslab.com image 198x286]

I thought you were lying. I had to look it up.

MIND. FARKING. BLOWN.


lol. i never lie about pop culture trivia.
 
2013-01-11 02:42:38 PM

Sticky Hands: however, what we DO know is the following: states with less strict gun control have lower firearm murder rates than states with more strict gun control.


Not true.

But you knew that.
 
2013-01-11 02:42:40 PM
Vegan Meat Popsicle When will people learn that the only solution to gun violence is guns?

The gun is not a solution to violence, its a means to protect yourself from it.

Problem being there are just too many issues causing the violence. Too much bad influence from the media, too much money in the wrong hands, too great of an imbalance in power, too many people in jail, too much blood already spilled, and too many crazies on the street.

We could be talking about guns or machetes or laser pistols or rocks. There's going to be quite a bit of Cain and Able going on unless the leadership does something about it.
Unfortunately, what they've chosen to do is tackle the "murders by X implement" stat.

When that fails or everyone starts using Y implement, they'll pretend this was unexpected and get to work on that next one.

The violence continues.
 
2013-01-11 02:43:58 PM

jaytkay: Frank N Stein: jaytkay: An armed society is a polite society. Like the south side of Chicago, for example.

Well, when you have measures the prohibit poor people from legally purchasing guns, that leaves only the cops and bad guys (sometimes there's little distinction between to two) who own firearms.

Why do you support prohibiting poor black people from legally purchasing firearms?

/South Side resident, BTW

The South and West sides have most of the guns in Chicago. And most of the crime.

Why haven't all those guns removed crime? Is Chicago somehow exempt from the Laws of Conservative Reality?


The guns are mostly in the hands of criminals, people who we can both agree shouldn't have them. Poor people who would legally want to purchase a firearm are prohibited by permit fees and training (in which they would have to go out of the city limits to attend, as well as pay the training costs).
With all the talk from pro-gun control advocates about it being time to have an honest discussion on guns in this country, why do you guys continue to insist on using dishonest rhetoric?
 
2013-01-11 02:44:53 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: When will people learn that the only solution to gun violence is guns?


Hey buddy! The strategy of mutually assured destruction worked to defeat those pinko, commie bastards...why do you hate 'Murika?
 
2013-01-11 02:46:09 PM

Benjamin Stone: I BLAME GORILLAZ:

Link


Sure, blame them if that will make you feel good.
 
2013-01-11 02:48:59 PM

Elegy: CSB:
I saw Art Spiegleman speak at a university oh, 10 or so years ago now. I was on the student side of the committee that brought him in (although not an important part) so I got to see some of the behind the scenes back and forth.

Spiegleman had it written into his contract that he was 100% allowed to smoke anywhere on campus while he was presenting. During his 1 hour speech, he stood on stage in a packed aditorium and smoked at an alarming rate, using one cigarette to light the next. by the end of the speech, his ashtray - sitting in the podium - had an enormous pile of butts.

He mentioned during his speech that "as I chain smoker in New York I'm normally on house arrest, so it's really nice to be able to get out and about here in the south".

After the speech, we herded him to the Q&A reception. At which he continued to smoke at a ferocious pace, only in a much smaller and more enclosed room. To this day, I'm not sure where he kept pulling the cigarettes from - it was like watching a magic trick. The man must have smoked 3 or 4 packs in 3 or so hours, and the supply never ran out.

After seeing this, I've always thought - as a smoker - that I'll finally know that I've "made it" when, like Art Spiegleman, I can insist in my contract that I can smoke anywhere I want, yet people still want me to come speak bad enough that they'll honor that sort of clause.

It was breathtaking to behold

/quite literally


That was, in fact, a CSB.

/smoking kills tho
 
2013-01-11 02:49:47 PM
After listening to NPR on my way to lunch today I've come to the conclusion that the world we live in now is to be filled with passionate people repeating (at brain-washing rapidity) "it's just wrong to have such a violence-loving society" (It's just wrong to have so many guns. It's just wrong to like guns so much. It's just wrong to have violent video games. etc.)

So, the anti-gun crowd has finally acknowledged that there are no logical arguments for new gun laws (i.e. nothing will stop a nutjob from stealing his mom's guns and killing kids), so now they are trying the "it's just wrong" method of touchy-feely pyscho-babble brainwashing to get rid of guns.

More easily ignored, but much more annoying in my book.
 
2013-01-11 02:50:03 PM

ciberido: Benjamin Stone: I BLAME GORILLAZ:

Link

Sure, blame them if that will make you feel good.


I've been stocking up on gorrilas, but not gorillaz.  I'm not allowed to possess Damon Alban due to previous convictions.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/gorilla-sales-skyrocket-after-lates t- gorilla-attac,30860/
 
2013-01-11 02:50:05 PM

ringersol: Frank N Stein: "I had a 10/22 as a kid. It was fun to shoot at cans."

I had a totally sweet Trapper Keeper.
It contained my homework and the awesome-to-a-kid doodles I made on my homework.

/ about as relevant
// it *was* totally sweet though
/// my teachers were not amused by the doodles
//// but back then you didn't get detention or expulsion for that sort of thing
// not even for the drawings you probably should not have drawn


In my back then story you didn't get in trouble bringing your .22 or shotgun to school so you could go hunting after class; You had to lock it up in your locker to keep it safe though. Teachers often wanted to see what you brought in. And I did not go to school in the toolies, exurbs I suppose you would call it now.
 
2013-01-11 02:50:38 PM
There were kids with guns at Newtown? I guess I missed that
 
2013-01-11 02:50:57 PM

neversubmit: GanjSmokr: moothemagiccow: neversubmit: When I was a kid I had a pump .22 and after a heavy rain I'd go to the wash out behind the pond and kill snakes so the cows would go to the high pasture. Then kids would trade punches, the shake and call it good. Today they talk shiat and pull guns.

Ahh, old people. Murder is just brand spanking new, isn't it?

Kids killing other kids at school with firearms? Yes, that is relatively new.

/there were plenty of guns in back windows in the school parking lot in my hometown during hunting season
//and even not during hunting season...
///shockingly enough, no school shootings ever happened there.

I wish you right and that young whipper snapper was full of it however... School shooting


Bob Geldof wrote "I Don't Like Mondays" in 1979.
 
2013-01-11 02:53:25 PM
According to the CDC, this is all the fault of brown people.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/stats_at-a_glance / hr_age-race.html
 
2013-01-11 02:53:49 PM

professor_tom:

Only pink guns, with ribbons and pikachu dangling from the trigger guard.


I'll call:

i135.photobucket.com
You can't see it too well, but the metal is powdercoated a sparkly purple. Oh, yeah...that's a "My Little Pony" assault case in the front.
 
2013-01-11 02:54:40 PM

Frank N Stein: jaytkay: Frank N Stein: jaytkay: An armed society is a polite society. Like the south side of Chicago, for example.

Well, when you have measures the prohibit poor people from legally purchasing guns, that leaves only the cops and bad guys (sometimes there's little distinction between to two) who own firearms.

Why do you support prohibiting poor black people from legally purchasing firearms?

/South Side resident, BTW

The South and West sides have most of the guns in Chicago. And most of the crime.

Why haven't all those guns removed crime? Is Chicago somehow exempt from the Laws of Conservative Reality?

The guns are mostly in the hands of criminals, people who we can both agree shouldn't have them. Poor people who would legally want to purchase a firearm are prohibited by permit fees and training (in which they would have to go out of the city limits to attend, as well as pay the training costs).
With all the talk from pro-gun control advocates about it being time to have an honest discussion on guns in this country, why do you guys continue to insist on using dishonest rhetoric?


Maybe because that's all he's got?
 
2013-01-11 02:57:17 PM

Rapmaster2000: ciberido: Benjamin Stone: I BLAME GORILLAZ:

Link

Sure, blame them if that will make you feel good.

I've been stocking up on gorrilas, but not gorillaz.  I'm not allowed to possess Damon Alban due to previous convictions.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/gorilla-sales-skyrocket-after-lates t- gorilla-attac,30860/


I blame Clint Eastwood.
 
2013-01-11 02:59:03 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: After listening to NPR on my way to lunch today I've come to the conclusion that the world we live in now is to be filled with passionate people repeating (at brain-washing rapidity) "it's just wrong to have such a violence-loving society" (It's just wrong to have so many guns. It's just wrong to like guns so much. It's just wrong to have violent video games. etc.)

So, the anti-gun crowd has finally acknowledged that there are no logical arguments for new gun laws (i.e. nothing will stop a nutjob from stealing his mom's guns and killing kids), so now they are trying the "it's just wrong" method of touchy-feely pyscho-babble brainwashing to get rid of guns.

More easily ignored, but much more annoying in my book.


The logical argument is that a nutjob and and his mother should probably be prevented from owning guns in the first place! It is logical, reasonable, sensible, practical, etc., for society to try to keep weapons from mentally ill people who pose a threat to themselves and others. To argue against this, as you appear to be doing, is irrational at best, but may possibly be an insane position itself.
 
2013-01-11 03:00:27 PM
cdn.head-fi.org
 
2013-01-11 03:01:31 PM

jaytkay: Sticky Hands: however, what we DO know is the following: states with less strict gun control have lower firearm murder rates than states with more strict gun control.

Not true.

But you knew that.


[citation needed], that goes for both of you.
 
2013-01-11 03:02:51 PM

Carn: DontMakeMeComeBackThere: After listening to NPR on my way to lunch today I've come to the conclusion that the world we live in now is to be filled with passionate people repeating (at brain-washing rapidity) "it's just wrong to have such a violence-loving society" (It's just wrong to have so many guns. It's just wrong to like guns so much. It's just wrong to have violent video games. etc.)

So, the anti-gun crowd has finally acknowledged that there are no logical arguments for new gun laws (i.e. nothing will stop a nutjob from stealing his mom's guns and killing kids), so now they are trying the "it's just wrong" method of touchy-feely pyscho-babble brainwashing to get rid of guns.

More easily ignored, but much more annoying in my book.

The logical argument is that a nutjob and and his mother should probably be prevented from owning guns in the first place! It is logical, reasonable, sensible, practical, etc., for society to try to keep weapons from mentally ill people who pose a threat to themselves and others. To argue against this, as you appear to be doing, is irrational at best, but may possibly be an insane position itself.


Don't the insane have a right to protect themselves from the people who are listening to the thoughts in my head?
 
2013-01-11 03:04:21 PM
The problem is that when some people think of "gun crime", they see only GUN crime, instead of gun CRIME.

This is a Crime problem that sometimes involves guns. Murder is the problem here, more than the weapon used. It is the INTENT, not the implement. It is also worth noting that overall crime rates are for more correlative to gun crime rates than almost anything else. Over the last decade or two, crime rates in general have been going down, and so, too have gun crime rates.

This is why efforts to limit law-abiding citizens gun ownership is ultimately inneffective. The Assault weapons ban did nothing to stop Columbine and other shootings because anyone who has determined to commit mass-murder is already immune to legal ramifications. You cannot affect people outside of the system by tightening up things inside the system. Further, the overwhelming majority of gun violence is perpetrated with illegal or stolen guns and almost never with 'assault weapons'. Since Sandy Hook, 695 people have been shot to death. (even if you exclude suicides - another conversation) that dwarfs the problem of crazed madmen. The problem has nothing really to do with the shape of the guns or the size of the magazines. These are palliative placebos.

If we are truly trying to reduce gun violence, we should be focusing our efforts squarely on the areas where we can do the most good: attacking illegal guns and closing the gun show loopholes. And frankly, I am becoming increasingly disapointed by people who are way too pre-occupied by the specifics of the sensational murder of affluent white suburbanite children while utterly ambivalent about the far more prevelant problem of poor, inner city brown kids being killed every day.
 
2013-01-11 03:06:02 PM

Rapmaster2000: Carn: DontMakeMeComeBackThere: After listening to NPR on my way to lunch today I've come to the conclusion that the world we live in now is to be filled with passionate people repeating (at brain-washing rapidity) "it's just wrong to have such a violence-loving society" (It's just wrong to have so many guns. It's just wrong to like guns so much. It's just wrong to have violent video games. etc.)

So, the anti-gun crowd has finally acknowledged that there are no logical arguments for new gun laws (i.e. nothing will stop a nutjob from stealing his mom's guns and killing kids), so now they are trying the "it's just wrong" method of touchy-feely pyscho-babble brainwashing to get rid of guns.

More easily ignored, but much more annoying in my book.

The logical argument is that a nutjob and and his mother should probably be prevented from owning guns in the first place! It is logical, reasonable, sensible, practical, etc., for society to try to keep weapons from mentally ill people who pose a threat to themselves and others. To argue against this, as you appear to be doing, is irrational at best, but may possibly be an insane position itself.

Don't the insane have a right to protect themselves from the people who are listening to the thoughts in my head?


Yes and we used to have nice safe places for them with nice comfy padded rooms, big warm shirts with really long sleeves, and lots of nice men in white coats. Unfortunately, we don't have many places like that any more.
 
2013-01-11 03:07:08 PM

Frank N Stein: why do you guys continue to insist on using dishonest rhetoric?


Denying obvious reality is dishonest. Willful ignorance is dishonest.

Gun wankers insist that more guns equals less crime. You trot out these stupid maxims ("An armed society is a polite society") and think you've proved something.

In reality, the crime-ridden areas of the US are awash in guns. The US has by far the most guns and by far the highest murder rate among.

Probably we're stuck with the problem, because we have a whole industries and a major political party thriving on the paranoid fears of ill-informed and emotional paranoid bed-wetters.

Fear sells. Fear-mongering is lucrative.And you impressionable gun enthusiasts can't get enough.
 
2013-01-11 03:07:22 PM

Carn: DontMakeMeComeBackThere: After listening to NPR on my way to lunch today I've come to the conclusion that the world we live in now is to be filled with passionate people repeating (at brain-washing rapidity) "it's just wrong to have such a violence-loving society" (It's just wrong to have so many guns. It's just wrong to like guns so much. It's just wrong to have violent video games. etc.)

So, the anti-gun crowd has finally acknowledged that there are no logical arguments for new gun laws (i.e. nothing will stop a nutjob from stealing his mom's guns and killing kids), so now they are trying the "it's just wrong" method of touchy-feely pyscho-babble brainwashing to get rid of guns.

More easily ignored, but much more annoying in my book.

The logical argument is that a nutjob and and his mother should probably be prevented from owning guns in the first place! It is logical, reasonable, sensible, practical, etc., for society to try to keep weapons from mentally ill people who pose a threat to themselves and others. To argue against this, as you appear to be doing, is irrational at best, but may possibly be an insane position itself.


Has anyone demonstrated that his mother was a danger? I believe there's been anecdotal evidence that folks could've known (even arguments that CT's firearm laws are rather strict, so the firearm's could've been seized had anyone notified them of the danger he poised) about him being a nutbag, but his mother (aside from the prepper thing, which isn't a note of anything dangerous) should've been good to go.
 
2013-01-11 03:08:08 PM

Marcintosh: muck4doo: kbronsito: So hipsters should buy guns for their children?

Hipsters are cool with stripping away your rights, as long as a Democrat is doing it.

it's getting tiresome.  You know tiresome like keeping track of the dead and wounded children, tiresome.


It wouldn't be so tiresome if you'd just adhere to the Golden Rule: Shoot 'em all, let God sort 'em out.

\or is that the Crimson Rule?
 
2013-01-11 03:08:49 PM

jaytkay: Fear sells. Fear-mongering is lucrative.And you impressionable gun enthusiasts can't get enough.


I just like shooting at targets of paper, cans, and animals when I'm hunting. Sorry I like things that you don't like.
 
2013-01-11 03:09:05 PM

dennysgod: jaytkay: Sticky Hands: however, what we DO know is the following: states with less strict gun control have lower firearm murder rates than states with more strict gun control.

Not true.

But you knew that.

[citation needed], that goes for both of you.


The onus is on the one making the claim.

And I bet he'll trot out statistics from proven fraud John Lott. They always do.
 
2013-01-11 03:10:35 PM

ronaprhys: Carn: DontMakeMeComeBackThere: After listening to NPR on my way to lunch today I've come to the conclusion that the world we live in now is to be filled with passionate people repeating (at brain-washing rapidity) "it's just wrong to have such a violence-loving society" (It's just wrong to have so many guns. It's just wrong to like guns so much. It's just wrong to have violent video games. etc.)

So, the anti-gun crowd has finally acknowledged that there are no logical arguments for new gun laws (i.e. nothing will stop a nutjob from stealing his mom's guns and killing kids), so now they are trying the "it's just wrong" method of touchy-feely pyscho-babble brainwashing to get rid of guns.

More easily ignored, but much more annoying in my book.

The logical argument is that a nutjob and and his mother should probably be prevented from owning guns in the first place! It is logical, reasonable, sensible, practical, etc., for society to try to keep weapons from mentally ill people who pose a threat to themselves and others. To argue against this, as you appear to be doing, is irrational at best, but may possibly be an insane position itself.

Has anyone demonstrated that his mother was a danger? I believe there's been anecdotal evidence that folks could've known (even arguments that CT's firearm laws are rather strict, so the firearm's could've been seized had anyone notified them of the danger he poised) about him being a nutbag, but his mother (aside from the prepper thing, which isn't a note of anything dangerous) should've been good to go.


My argument regarding his mother is that since she had a mentally ill person living in her house that should be taken into consideration when she would purchase a gun, ie, it should be restricted. Perhaps not outright disallowed, we could have a "home defense" clause. "Ok, you have a psychotic adult living in your house, you can purchase one shotgun to defend yourself, family and property, but that's it."
 
2013-01-11 03:11:45 PM

jaytkay: Frank N Stein: why do you guys continue to insist on using dishonest rhetoric?

Denying obvious reality is dishonest. Willful ignorance is dishonest.

Gun wankers insist that more guns equals less crime. You trot out these stupid maxims ("An armed society is a polite society") and think you've proved something.

In reality, the crime-ridden areas of the US are awash in guns. The US has by far the most guns and by far the highest murder rate among.

Probably we're stuck with the problem, because we have a whole industries and a major political party thriving on the paranoid fears of ill-informed and emotional paranoid bed-wetters.

Fear sells. Fear-mongering is lucrative.And you impressionable gun enthusiasts can't get enough.


Again, you keep going with the same sort of simplistic nonsense that you're accusing firearm owners of. Nice.

-illegally-purchased firearms being used in the commission of crimes vs legally-purchased firearms.
Yep - no difference between those two.
 
2013-01-11 03:13:30 PM

ciberido: Benjamin Stone: I BLAME GORILLAZ:

Link

Sure, blame them if that will make you feel good.


I don't, but thanks for linking to "Clint Eastwood." :D
 
2013-01-11 03:13:30 PM

Carn: My argument regarding his mother is that since she had a mentally ill person living in her house that should be taken into consideration when she would purchase a gun, ie, it should be restricted. Perhaps not outright disallowed, we could have a "home defense" clause. "Ok, you have a psychotic adult living in your house, you can purchase one shotgun to defend yourself, family and property, but that's it."


How would you enforce that? Was this idiot actually clinically-diagnosed as mentally ill?
 
2013-01-11 03:13:46 PM

jaytkay: MythDragon: All these discussions about guns have made me realise I am wrong. We *SHOULD* ban hi capacity clips. There is no reason ANYONE needs a clip that holds more than 10 rounds. So I am now in favor of getting rid of all hi-capacity clips, and I vow before Fark, that I will not use a clip that holds more than 10 rounds for any of my guns.

[www.m1-garand-rifle.com image 437x374][encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 289x174]
^ Clip

"Hurr, durr, somebody doesn't understand the difference between a clip and a magazine."

Therefore GUNS!!!! Case CLOSE!!!!11!!


When congress is considering legislation which may ban citizens from owning a certain item they should at least recognize what it is they are banning. It's a legitimate grievance. Look at all the "internet is a series of tubes" jokes when the SOPA hearings were going on. It's unprofessional to haphazardly pass legislation that affects millions of people without even knowing what you are talking about.
 
Displayed 50 of 234 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report