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  
•       •       •

18236 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 04:17:56 PM

moothemagiccow: 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.

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


While I could have typed Ganjs post verbatim, I can also answer your question.

We have even MORE young people with guns in my area, we have had zero gun shootings in living memory.

It goes back to teaching fun safety and responsibility.

My son got his first .22 at nine. He can almost outshoot me and is responsible and safe with it.
 
2013-01-11 04:28:14 PM
Thirty years ago, I used to go hunting early in the morning, stow my shotgun in my locker, and go on about my school day. The difference: Hollywood and rap music hadn't gotten into full swing yet, with the glorification of violence.
 
2013-01-11 04:38:18 PM

Elegy: moothemagiccow: hinten: Insert a tasteless joke about missing the gas 40 years ago only to smoke himself to death later.

Spiegelman isn't a holocaust survivor

And the holocaust occured 70 years ago.


 That's what I get for even alluding to a bad joke.

He is, what they call, a second generation Holocaust survivor.
 
2013-01-11 04:42:44 PM

GoodyearPimp: Secret Master of All Flatulence: Everybody seems to get POed at the suggestion of arming such teachers that want to be armed and that meet, say, the training standards in place for police officers. I keep asking folks who oppose such an idea "If you can't trust your child's teacher with a gun, WHY ARE YOU TRUSTING THEM WITH YOUR CHILD?!?!?" They mostly just look at me like I'm nuts.

I think we should allow a few school to engage in this practice as test sites. Let them self-select, test the efficacy. Remind the red-staters that this means either increased taxes to pay for it or decreased teacher quality. God will sort it all out.


IIRC, it's already in place in a couple of states. The teachers have to pay for the training, et cetera, out of their own pockets. Oddly enough, the ones who cared enough to do it haven't suddenly started killing their students or co-workers.
 
2013-01-11 04:46:54 PM

Elegy: moothemagiccow: hinten: Insert a tasteless joke about missing the gas 40 years ago only to smoke himself to death later.

Spiegelman isn't a holocaust survivor

And the holocaust occured 70 years ago.


It's never too late to die in a freak gas accident.
www.thehulltruth.com

If there is anything that this horrible tragedy can teach us, it's that a male model's life is a precious, precious commodity. Just because we have chiseled abs and stunning features, it doesn't mean that we too can't not die in a freak gasoline fight accident.
 
2013-01-11 04:49:51 PM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: But I'll bet you any amount of money that you could never get a law that says "You can't own a gun because a relative of yours is insane" to pass Constitutional muster.


You wouldn't even need to leave the "Patrick Henry" chapter of the reasoning of the founding fathers.

\The nutballs loved ol' Patrick.
 
2013-01-11 04:55:10 PM

BojanglesPaladin: Carn: I'm more interested in requiring liability insurance as part of a licensing requirement.

Can you explain why you think liability insurance on a gun (which is readily available currently) would have any affect on reducing gun crime?


Criminal liability if a gun you own is used in a crime...make people responsible for the safe keeping of their weapons.
The military keep strict accounting and control procedures for their weapons, hold citizens to a similar standard.
/maybe limit the reporting procedures to military style weapons, high capacity capable rifles and shotguns,and handguns....keeping the hunting specific rifles and shotguns exempt.
/weapons designed for military applications (even if it isn't officially mil spec, absent the fun switch) are very efficient at what they were designed for,killing and maiming quickly and efficiently. If you want one then by all means it is your right, but it should carry responsibility.
 
2013-01-11 04:57:07 PM
I was brought up in a rural community and taught to hunt and shoot. Moved to a city, and no longer hunt. I don't need a gun, and I don't see why other people who aren't hunting or sport shooting or for employment need one either. "I need one for self-protection' is the biggest piece of horse shiat I've heard.
 
2013-01-11 04:58:55 PM

jaytkay: 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.


I had a nice long response written up.
But the fark DB blew up and I lost it so I will shorten it.


How about the FBI?
Murder by State, Types of Weapons, 2011 table 20. hell pick any year you want the pattern stays the same.

Cross reference that with the 10 best and worst state for gun laws as compiled by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (LCtoPGV: )


I will include the percentage of homicides by firearm for 2011 from the FBI tables, the percentage next to the state name is the total number of firearm murders divided by the total number of murders.

I will also summize the best and worst list according to LCtoPGV:

best: CA, NJ, MA, CT, NY, MD, IL, RI, MI
Worst: SD, AZ, MI, VT, LA, MT, WY, KY, KA, OK

The gist is: When compared to other states in their region, states with better LCtoPGV grades have a HIGHER percentage of their homicides committed by firearm than those that do not.

Example: NE USA.

State name (grade) gun homicide rate
I round DOWN to FAVOR the gun control states, I round UP to disadvantage the less controlled states.

best scores:
NJ (A-) 70%
NY (B-) 57%
MA (A-) 66%

Worst:
VT (F) 50%
ME (F) 48%
NH (D) 38%

Highest rates in the NE?
PA (C) 73%
CT(B) 73%
NJ (A-) 70%

This holds in any portion of the USA.
The best of the best states ( Only three where graded A- or higher) is MA at 66.7% has a lower gun homicide rate than exactly TWO of the worst ten. (LA 82% and MI 73%) and is tied with Kansas.

Hawaii (B ) did have the lowest gun homicide rate in the nation in 2011, at 14%, and their TOTAL murders (7!) are a third of the year before (20+) (going back to previous years they run close to 50%) I would like to see what they have done overall.

The next lowest of the "good" states is RI (C+) with a rate of 35.7%. the lowest of the bad (all ten were given F) states?

SD (F) 33.4% and MT (F) at 38%

the two states with the highest gun murder rates are:
IL (B-) at 83%
LA (F) 82%

AS mentioned above New Jersey (which gets an A- for gun control) has a rate of 70%

I looked into this a while back when I read two articles that didn't jive with other things I knew.

1st was one claiming gun DEATHS would pass car deaths in a few years. ~35-40k per year
2ed one by LCtoPGV claiming gun DEATHS were higher in states with less gun control. (which cited my own state)

Both articles then talked about gun control to prevent HOMICIDES.

The only POSSIBLE way they could have honestly gotten those numbers is by including suicides.

Feel free to play with these or get your own version and compare different years (And watch the homicide rate drop across the country)

Alaska 0.551724138
Arizona 0.654867257
Arkansas 0.718954248
California 0.681564246
Colorado 0.496598639
Connecticut 0.734375
Delaware 0.682926829
District of Columbia 0.712962963
Georgia 0.708812261
Hawaii 0.142857143
Idaho 0.53125
Illinois3 0.834070796
Indiana 0.644366197
Iowa 0.431818182
Kansas 0.663636364
Kentucky 0.666666667
Louisiana 0.828865979
Maine 0.48
Maryland 0.683417085
Massachusetts 0.666666667
Michigan 0.734094617
Minnesota 0.614285714
Mississippi 0.737967914
Missouri 0.758241758
Montana 0.388888889
Nebraska 0.646153846
Nevada 0.581395349
New Hampshire 0.375
New Jersey 0.709762533
New Mexico 0.495867769
New York 0.574935401
North Carolina 0.685071575
North Dakota 0.5
Ohio 0.704918033
Oklahoma 0.642156863
Oregon 0.519480519
Pennsylvania 0.738993711
Rhode Island 0.357142857
South Carolina 0.699059561
South Dakota 0.333333333
Tennessee 0.654155496
Texas 0.641873278
Utah 0.509803922
Vermont 0.5
Virginia 0.686468647
Washington 0.49068323
West Virginia 0.581081081
Wisconsin 0.592592593
Wyoming 0.733333333
Virgin Islands 0.815789474
 
2013-01-11 04:59:37 PM

HAMMERTOE: Thirty years ago, I used to go hunting early in the morning, stow my shotgun in my locker, and go on about my school day. The difference: Hollywood and rap music hadn't gotten into full swing yet, with the glorification of violence.


And for thirty years, violent crime in the U.S. has trended steadily downward. Therefore, increasingly graphic Hollywood films and gangster-rap music have a positive affect, and help reduce violence overall.

That's the logical conclusion of your argument.
 
2013-01-11 05:00:48 PM

ansius: I was brought up in a rural community and taught to hunt and shoot. Moved to a city, and no longer hunt. I don't need a gun, and I don't see why other people who aren't hunting or sport shooting or for employment need one either. "I need one for self-protection' is the biggest piece of horse shiat I've heard.


Why did you quit hunting? I can't imagine giving it up. City living with no hunting on the calendar would be miserable.
 
2013-01-11 05:06:29 PM

Mr_Fabulous: HAMMERTOE: Thirty years ago, I used to go hunting early in the morning, stow my shotgun in my locker, and go on about my school day. The difference: Hollywood and rap music hadn't gotten into full swing yet, with the glorification of violence.

And for thirty years, violent crime in the U.S. has trended steadily downward. Therefore, increasingly graphic Hollywood films and gangster-rap music have a positive affect, and help reduce violence overall.

That's the logical conclusion of your argument.


Seems logical to me.

Though the drop began in 1994-1995 I believe

Since that time we have had increasingly violent video games, increasingly violent movies, increasing violent TV, Gangster rap came and went, more and more and more guns on the streets, and yet the wave of violence rolled back.

In fact, with the exception of about 3 years in the 60s and 1950-1957 one would have to go back before 1910 to find lower crime rates.
 
2013-01-11 05:11:46 PM

Mr_Fabulous: HAMMERTOE: Thirty years ago, I used to go hunting early in the morning, stow my shotgun in my locker, and go on about my school day. The difference: Hollywood and rap music hadn't gotten into full swing yet, with the glorification of violence.

And for thirty years, violent crime in the U.S. has trended steadily downward. Therefore, increasingly graphic Hollywood films and gangster-rap music have a positive affect, and help reduce violence overall.

That's the logical conclusion of your argument.


Not really. I'm not seeing how we could decide either way. "Media got more violent" is hardly the only thing to have changed through that time.

That said, I would guess, fully admitting that it is a guess, that witnessing on average 80,000 killings by the end of middle school is probably having a negative effect on our psyches.

Not that that's a call for any sort of official regulation. Just change the channel every now and then, goddamn.
 
2013-01-11 05:31:11 PM
I would prefer we can return to a time where people weren't paranoid and did not believe in group punishment.
 
2013-01-11 05:38:31 PM

busy chillin': It's like 10,000 spoons will all you need is a high-powered semi automatic rifle.


I snerted aloud, at work...
 
2013-01-11 05:45:59 PM
I always had a gun when I was a kid.

Never shot anybody. Only deer and rabbits

Now, if you look like a deer or a rabbit, you're in trouble ... but the Nanny Staters?

We'll find out how well it's going to work for people scared of violence and guns to try and take away the 2nd Amendment from people not afraid of violence and guns. (thinking thinking)

Have they thought through their cunning plan?
 
2013-01-11 06:05:26 PM

ansius: I was brought up in a rural community and taught to hunt and shoot. Moved to a city, and no longer hunt. I don't need a gun, and I don't see why other people who aren't hunting or sport shooting or for employment need one either. "I need one for self-protection' is the biggest piece of horse shiat I've heard.


Yeah, this. I lived across the street from an anonymous gay sex meth club, and there were dealers in my building, but there was only one time I ever 'needed' to use a gun. Instead I sprayed a junkie in the face with mace, and wasn't arrested for discharging a firearm in the city.

Of course, according to "Predator", "Fort Apache the Bronx", etc., the city will EAT YOU ALIVE. And didja ever notice how most gunsuckers live either in the suburbs or out in the sticks? Yeah, lotsa need out there to defend against the rampaging horde. And by that I mean blacks and muslims.
 
2013-01-11 06:11:32 PM

Allen. The end.:
Yeah, this. I lived across the street from an anonymous gay sex meth club, and there were dealers in my building, but there was only one time I ever 'needed' to use a gun. Instead I sprayed a junkie in the face with mace, and wasn't arrested for discharging a firearm in the city.


I used to have a crackhouse across the street. No joke...one of the dealers used a claw hammer on a customer in the middle of the night, and I had to go out to patch the poor fellow up. I ended up "convincing" them to move on, with zero rounds expended. There are times when it's definitely advantageous to be thought to be "heavily armed, easily bored, and off my medications."
 
2013-01-11 06:35:16 PM

Sticky Hands: jaytkay: dennysgod: jaytkay: Sticky Hands: I had a nice long response written up.
But the fark DB blew up and I lost it so I will shorten it...


That's the short version?

There really isn't a viable argument to be found in there.
 
2013-01-11 06:58:30 PM
Yep, the roughly 50 million "citizens" that have been executed by their own governments just this past century alone (all in the name of safety and security) Are pretty gaddamn hilarious. (hear the laughter?)

Oh, that's right...that never happens I forget.

So what IS the color of the sky in your world?

In some sick way I hope that you assbags do win, pass restrictive laws and reap the "benefits" of your shiatty decisions when crime goes through the roof. (Stuhtiztiks...how DO they work? Facts?....who needz em? They just get in the way of Progress!)
Then every person that might have been able to defend themselves, will be your fault and you can bet your ass we'll let you hear it until the crappy laws are repealed.

But in reality I'd rather avoid that and spend our energy solving real problems, like the economy and our F-d up health care system.

Guess that won't happen either...too many hard to get rights to go after with these crises ripe for the picking....
 
2013-01-11 07:01:44 PM

computerguyUT: Yep, the roughly 50 million "citizens" that have been executed by their own governments just this past century alone (all in the name of safety and security) Are pretty gaddamn hilarious. (hear the laughter?)

Oh, that's right...that never happens I forget.

So what IS the color of the sky in your world?

In some sick way I hope that you assbags do win, pass restrictive laws and reap the "benefits" of your shiatty decisions when crime goes through the roof. (Stuhtiztiks...how DO they work? Facts?....who needz em? They just get in the way of Progress!)
Then every person that might have been able to defend themselves, will be your fault and you can bet your ass we'll let you hear it until the crappy laws are repealed.

But in reality I'd rather avoid that and spend our energy solving real problems, like the economy and our F-d up health care system.

Guess that won't happen either...too many hard to get rights to go after with these crises ripe for the picking....

You forgot to say "WOLVERINES!!"
 
2013-01-11 07:32:52 PM

NightOwl2255: New day, new gun thread? Check.


I know, what's the big deal? You'd think somebody died or something.
 
2013-01-11 07:49:35 PM

jaytkay: Sticky Hands: jaytkay: dennysgod: jaytkay: Sticky Hands: I had a nice long response written up.
But the fark DB blew up and I lost it so I will shorten it...

That's the short version?

There really isn't a viable argument to be found in there.


The long version had a better breakdown for each region of the USA for a more apples to apples comparison.

If gun control worked as advertised, states with strict gun control would have lower gun homicide rates that states that do not have strict gun control. If for no other reason that everyone having a gun in the other states would make them more likely to use it.

The data shows that this is not in fact the case.


Now my personal suggestions for what WOULD make people safer.
End the drug war.
Clamp down on illegal immigration so that the unskilled do not have to compete with an ever growing supply of labor willing to work for below market rates.
Toss aside the very one sided "free trade" game we play that benefits only the richest and put some tariffs on goods from countries that get a competitive advantage by not paying their workers and doing atrocious things to the environment.
And stop the practices of punishing a person forever for their mistakes.

A man (and men are by far the most likely to commit violent crime) with something to lose is much less likely to be criminal.
 
2013-01-11 08:10:17 PM

jaytkay: Sticky Hands: jaytkay: dennysgod: jaytkay: Sticky Hands: I had a nice long response written up.
But the fark DB blew up and I lost it so I will shorten it...

That's the short version?

There really isn't a viable argument to be found in there.


So wait - you said that states with strict gun control laws don't have higher homicide rates and he posted stats that contradict your position and that's the best you've got.

Wow.
 
2013-01-11 08:13:49 PM
"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither"- Benjamin Franklin

The 4th amendment is not worth the paper it is written on.

It looks like the 2nd is next.

The 1st has been perverted to allow hateful people to spew filth.

It seems to me; that we are all being punished for the actions of a few.

I submit that the true issue should be mental health; not gun control. The solution isn't locking up people forever; but, neither is it letting them run around hurting people.

I propose that a happy medium be reached. Truly dangerous individuals need to be kept from hurting others.

Rather than sacrificing a freedom for a feel-good bill that does nothing; I say we should reform the mental health system in this country.
 
2013-01-11 08:14:30 PM

Sticky Hands: If gun control worked as advertised, states with strict gun control would have lower gun homicide rates that states that do not have strict gun control


You can't jump to that conclusion. Maybe lax gun laws in one state leads to more murder in another. States aren't sealed containers.

There is a well-documented flow of guns out of states like Virginia to places like New York.

Here in Chicago, between 2008 and 2012, 3,100 guns seized by Chicago police could be traced back to Indiana guns shops.
 
2013-01-11 10:37:08 PM

jaytkay: Sticky Hands: If gun control worked as advertised, states with strict gun control would have lower gun homicide rates that states that do not have strict gun control

You can't jump to that conclusion. Maybe lax gun laws in one state leads to more murder in another. States aren't sealed containers.

There is a well-documented flow of guns out of states like Virginia to places like New York.

Here in Chicago, between 2008 and 2012, 3,100 guns seized by Chicago police could be traced back to Indiana guns shops.



So why don't places like Virginia and Indiana have the murder rates of New York and Chicago?
 
2013-01-11 11:42:08 PM

NightOwl2255: New day, new gun thread? Check.


As long as we have school shootings, we'll have gun threads.
 
2013-01-12 02:12:25 AM

Begoggle: neversubmit: [i.imgur.com image 530x397]

OK, let me take a shot at explaining this.
Yes, 2 hours of violence in a movie DOES influence SOME people. The mentally weak, deranged, and ill. People that are already violent seek out those types of movies, and it's a self-feeding cycle. In fact, most people are probably influenced in some way. Some people are repulsed by it and want nothing to do with violence. But the vast majority of people are not influenced to simply go imitate what they see on the screen. This is because most people know the difference between reality and fantasy, good and bad, right and wrong. The 99.99999% of people who watch them recognize the difference between the outrageous caricatures of humans in a movie, and real humans in real life.
Sure, if a bunch of guys kidnap your daughter and you have a particular set of skills, then maybe a movie would influence you to go use those skills, but otherwise, no.
The Super Bowl commercial is trying to sell you a real-life product - or at the very least make you aware that it exists.
The movie is not trying to convince you to go shoot people.

Agreed, they are just trying to make money by telling stories of conflict - which by the way if you have no conflict in a movie you have either a documentary or a home movie.
But-
It makes (along with every other violent commercial and movie you watch) violence seem more respectable or at least acceptable.  For example - Even the Power Puff Girls resort to violence to save the day.  Pringles chips are now blowing up grocery store aisles in commercials.  Over years of visual consumption the message is hammered home that violence, even extreme violence, is acceptable.
Now with the wonderful FX that are possible it looks more realistic than ever and harder than ever to differentiate it from reality.
There's no one problem.  It's a whole raft of problems that together get us where we are today.  It's gun control, it's mental health, it's economics, it's the media and entertainment, it's a perversion of the constitution driven by capitalism, it's fear that makes people line up in front of a gun shop in CT today.  It's a place that nobody could have predicted before now.  It's our society which I think will start eating it's self pretty soon if it hasn't started yet.
 
2013-01-12 03:11:07 AM
Surely not a Mauser?
 
2013-01-12 10:51:12 AM
Liam Burns:So why don't places like Virginia and Indiana have the murder rates of New York and Chicago?

Ahhh, another example of conservative brilliance.

New York has a lower murder rate than both Indiana and Virgina. Illinois is a little higher.

Link
 
2013-01-12 11:19:58 AM

jaytkay: Liam Burns:So why don't places like Virginia and Indiana have the murder rates of New York and Chicago?

Ahhh, another example of conservative brilliance.

New York has a lower murder rate than both Indiana and Virgina. Illinois is a little higher.

Link


Your data is a bit stale, BTW.
 
2013-01-12 11:32:23 AM

BojanglesPaladin: jaytkay: Liam Burns:So why don't places like Virginia and Indiana have the murder rates of New York and Chicago?

Ahhh, another example of conservative brilliance.

New York has a lower murder rate than both Indiana and Virgina. Illinois is a little higher.

Link

Your data is a bit stale, BTW.


So show us something better. Make a useful contribution, don't gripe.
 
2013-01-12 11:01:54 PM

jaytkay: So show us something better. Make a useful contribution, don't gripe.


Not a gripe. Just pointing out that more recent city data is readily available.As well as state.
 
Displayed 34 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