Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(The New York Times)   Headline: "How to shoot a gun." Story: "How to spend two whole hours on a gun range and still be scared to death of guns and gun owners"   (nytimes.com) divider line 381
    More: Fail, firing ranges, gun owners, no compromise, trigger fingers, gun culture, mental health professional, guns  
•       •       •

7818 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2013 at 8:49 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-15 02:16:16 AM  
There is probably no one at the NYTimes that is qualified to say anything about guns - ever.

They can review lattes and bagels, but the NYTimes needs to STFU when it comes to guns. They don't have the slightest clue.
 
2013-01-15 03:06:04 AM  

MeinRS6: There is probably no one at the NYTimes that is qualified to say anything about guns - ever.


There might be one or two.
 
2013-01-15 03:47:10 AM  
You wanna know something ironic about the New York Times?

In the early 1860s, Richard Gatling was having a difficult time convincing the US Army that his multi-barreled "machine gun" had any utility for them. He had performed numerous demonstrations that impressed the folks who saw it, but nobody could get the funding to actually purchase and field the things.

Than in July of 1863, Irish immigrants started to riot against the Federal draft. Most of the able bodied males in New York had left the city to fight in the war far too the south, so the city was generally defenseless against the swelling riots.

Except for the New York Times. Henry Raymond (the NYT's owner and editor) had followed the development of Gatling's new weapon and, seeing the impending riot creep up, had dispatched for a number of them to be delivered to the New York Times post-haste. The first time the Gatling gun was ever deployed in a conflict? To defend the New York Times headquarters. Raymond manned one himself.

The press Gatling received from this deployment was enough to start breaking through the crusty US Army procurement process. Guns of his design were employed at the tail end of the Civil War, and derivatives of the basic concept are still in service today.

And now, the New York Times has decided that people have little/no business owning "weapons of war" since civilians have no "need" for such things.
 
2013-01-15 06:05:43 AM  
Xenophobic old fruit.
 
2013-01-15 07:02:30 AM  

Elvis_Bogart: Xenophobic old fruit.


Ah, the voice of respectful debate.
 
2013-01-15 07:17:41 AM  

dr-shotgun: The first time the Gatling gun was ever deployed in a conflict? To defend the New York Times headquarters. Raymond manned one himself.


Nailed it.

I reckon there's a few gun owners on the staff.

But logic and honesty don't sell papers. Yellow journalism sells papers.
 
2013-01-15 08:53:11 AM  
If you're an adult and no one has shown you how to shoot a gun, your parents failed you.

/inb4 picture of lanza
 
2013-01-15 08:54:59 AM  
Well, let's be honest some gun owners ARE scary......

/scary has nothing to do with gun ownership
/people kill people with or without guns
/get off my lawn
 
2013-01-15 08:55:20 AM  
I love shooting, it's fun. Done it many times as a kid/young adult.

I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.
 
2013-01-15 08:56:16 AM  

Frank N Stein: If you're an adult and no one has shown you how to shoot a gun, your parents failed you.

/inb4 picture of lanza


I wouldn't go that far, however I'd say that my father and grandfather taking me out into the woods on their property with an old Mossberg 46a .22 rifle and teaching me how to shoot was one of the better experiences of my life. I think I was 8 or 9 at the time.

In my opinion, the earlier one learns about firearms and firearm safety, the better.
 
2013-01-15 08:58:41 AM  
The article was an op-ed about a guy's first time experience at the gun range.

Only a true paranoid would think there was some vast conspiracy behind it. No one like that will shoe up here, I bet.
 
2013-01-15 08:58:41 AM  
That article basically said "I decided to try this out, didn't care for it, but the people I talked to were helpful and perfectly nice folks with opinions that differ from my own".

The response from the "responsible guns owners" of Fark so far boils down to "latte-sipping ivory tower hateful liberal scum STFU blaaarrrrgggh GATLING GUN!!"

But, no, I can't imagine why so many people view "responsible gun owners" as unhinged, rabid maniacs... surely there's just no reason at all for it.
 
2013-01-15 08:59:19 AM  
My Assault Weapons (under the rumored gun control plan)
Without research:
can you tell which is deadlier?
can you tell what makes them assault?

I'm tempted to go buy a couple rifles and put my kids as the owners, just in case these laws go into effect and makes the transfer of these 40yo+ firearms to them illegal.

37pawn.com

jacobsonsguncenter.com
 
2013-01-15 08:59:23 AM  

LasersHurt: I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.


I'm scared of people with hands, almost every killer I've read about used them. Need to ban them since they're used in so many murders.
 
2013-01-15 08:59:27 AM  
I didn't quite get that vibe from the article but you go on with your bad self, subby.
 
2013-01-15 08:59:35 AM  

Strik3r: Well, let's be honest some gun owners ARE scary......

/scary has nothing to do with gun ownership
/people kill people with or without guns
/get off my lawn


I've found that every hobby has some scary people who take it way, way too seriously. Of course, a Coca-Cola collector can't easily kill their family with a vintage bottle.
 
2013-01-15 09:00:22 AM  

MeinRS6: There is probably no one at the NYTimes that is qualified to say anything about guns - ever.

They can review lattes and bagels, but the NYTimes needs to STFU when it comes to guns. They don't have the slightest clue.


Can they review the arts? Restaurants? Fashion? Why would I read the Times for a gun review. That's why I read Guns & Ammo or Handguns. What makes one qualified to talk about guns? I was disappointed he used the blanket term "assault weapon" as if it was some sort of description, but at least he tried. Shooting is a violent act and it's not for everyone. He brought the perspective of one who doesn't shoot, doesn't like to shoot, and doesn't understand why people like to shoot. I don't see anything wrong with at least trying.
 
2013-01-15 09:01:29 AM  

MichiganFTL: LasersHurt: I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.

I'm scared of people with hands, almost every killer I've read about used them. Need to ban them since they're used in so many murders.


There are fewer people who are psychotic about their hands, and if they ARE psychotic about their hands they often get committed.
 
2013-01-15 09:01:46 AM  

LasersHurt: I love shooting, it's fun. Done it many times as a kid/young adult.

I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.


Yup. Holding a gun for a while and shooting it at a target doesn't automatically make you a paranoid, delusional asshole. But being a paranoid, delusional asshole makes you feel the need to own an arsenal and scream at anyone who questions your responsibility and/or sanity.
 
2013-01-15 09:02:04 AM  
FTA:

...fearing, against all available evidence, that the federal government was about to crack down on gun ownership.

Yeah, all evidence clearly indicates that the Federal Government has zero plans to try to pass new gun control legislation in the near future... not one bit... Oh, wait..
 
2013-01-15 09:02:49 AM  
Should have let him pop off a few rounds with a Barret .50. Once he had the feel of that long hard shaft of metal in his hands and felt the thrilling blast of power when it went off, he would understand.
 
2013-01-15 09:03:46 AM  

dr-shotgun: You wanna know something ironic about the New York Times?

In the early 1860s, Richard Gatling was having a difficult time convincing the US Army that his multi-barreled "machine gun" had any utility for them. He had performed numerous demonstrations that impressed the folks who saw it, but nobody could get the funding to actually purchase and field the things.

Than in July of 1863, Irish immigrants started to riot against the Federal draft. Most of the able bodied males in New York had left the city to fight in the war far too the south, so the city was generally defenseless against the swelling riots.

Except for the New York Times. Henry Raymond (the NYT's owner and editor) had followed the development of Gatling's new weapon and, seeing the impending riot creep up, had dispatched for a number of them to be delivered to the New York Times post-haste. The first time the Gatling gun was ever deployed in a conflict? To defend the New York Times headquarters. Raymond manned one himself.

The press Gatling received from this deployment was enough to start breaking through the crusty US Army procurement process. Guns of his design were employed at the tail end of the Civil War, and derivatives of the basic concept are still in service today.

And now, the New York Times has decided that people have little/no business owning "weapons of war" since civilians have no "need" for such things.



I was unware that Hank Raymond was still in editorial control of the NY Times, learn something new everyday, I guess.
 
2013-01-15 09:04:25 AM  

AdmirableSnackbar: LasersHurt: I love shooting, it's fun. Done it many times as a kid/young adult.

I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.

Yup. Holding a gun for a while and shooting it at a target doesn't automatically make you a paranoid, delusional asshole. But being a paranoid, delusional asshole makes you feel the need to own an arsenal and scream at anyone who questions your responsibility and/or sanity.


This. I am for the right to own guns, it's in the constitution, and as much as I hate having the arguments, guns don't actually kill - if you kept them locked up, unloaded, responsibly, they're pretty safe.

I have met way too many unhinged lunatics, however, who have every right to own an arsenal, to be "comfortable" with it. For many, the idea of the right outweighs the reality of it on the ground, and I can't agree with that.
 
2013-01-15 09:04:28 AM  

joness0154: Frank N Stein: If you're an adult and no one has shown you how to shoot a gun, your parents failed you.

/inb4 picture of lanza

I wouldn't go that far, however I'd say that my father and grandfather taking me out into the woods on their property with an old Mossberg 46a .22 rifle and teaching me how to shoot was one of the better experiences of my life. I think I was 8 or 9 at the time.

In my opinion, the earlier one learns about firearms and firearm safety, the better.


Oh I agree. In my instance, shooting was in the context of hunting and more broadly outdoor activities in general. Growing up in the Chicago suburbs, I think I was the only kid in my group of friends that could hunt, clean a fish, start a fire without a match, identify edible mushrooms, identify flora and fauna, field strip and clean a gun, rig together shelter, right a tipped canoe etc... Basically boyscout type shiat

I just find it strange that so many of my fellow city-folk are so distant from any sort of self reliance, as if the veneer of civilization is impenituable and they're not one power outage away from having to their next meal from someplace other than McDonalds.
 
2013-01-15 09:04:43 AM  
The combination of President Obama's re-election and the Newtown massacre has caused gun proponents to stock up, fearing, against all available evidence, that the federal government was about to crack down on gun ownership.

I don't think anyone who's been following the news since last summer will question that a crackdown was (and now is) high on the presidents list of post election things to do.
I'm not sure which evidence this guy is seeing that goes against it.
 
2013-01-15 09:05:20 AM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: but the people I talked to were helpful and perfectly nice folks with opinions that differ from my own


More like: "The people were nice, but I think they could snap at a moments notice and use their 30-bullet assault clips to start killing people. Kentucky doesn't care about Newtown. Forward."

Bud's Gun Shop was cavernous, with scarcely a square inch of wall space that didn't have a gun on it.

I know what you mean. The last time I was in Pep boys there was hardly an inch of wall space that didn't have some sort of auto parts on it. Maybe Buds should install come crazy, wacky American tchochkies like at TGI Fridays?
 
2013-01-15 09:05:30 AM  

dr-shotgun: You wanna know something ironic about the New York Times?

In the early 1860s, Richard Gatling was having a difficult time convincing the US Army that his multi-barreled "machine gun" had any utility for them. He had performed numerous demonstrations that impressed the folks who saw it, but nobody could get the funding to actually purchase and field the things.

Than in July of 1863, Irish immigrants started to riot against the Federal draft. Most of the able bodied males in New York had left the city to fight in the war far too the south, so the city was generally defenseless against the swelling riots.

Except for the New York Times. Henry Raymond (the NYT's owner and editor) had followed the development of Gatling's new weapon and, seeing the impending riot creep up, had dispatched for a number of them to be delivered to the New York Times post-haste. The first time the Gatling gun was ever deployed in a conflict? To defend the New York Times headquarters. Raymond manned one himself.

The press Gatling received from this deployment was enough to start breaking through the crusty US Army procurement process. Guns of his design were employed at the tail end of the Civil War, and derivatives of the basic concept are still in service today.

And now, the New York Times has decided that people have little/no business owning "weapons of war" since civilians have no "need" for such things.


Because whatever you did 100+ years ago still sticks to you. If you're a newspaper.

But stuff your company or party said and did 50 years ago? Ancient history. Or 8 years ago? "B-b-b-but Bush!"
 
2013-01-15 09:05:31 AM  
Guns are like an insurance policy for people who don't understand probability. Sure you unlikely to ever need your gun to defend you or your family, and sure your loved ones are more likely to die from a gun by just having one in your house but damn it no one better ever try to regulate them!
 
2013-01-15 09:05:40 AM  
...has caused gun proponents to stock up, fearing, against all available evidence, that the federal government was about to crack down on gun ownership.

So NY banning guns,and people saying at the federal level we need to get rid of "assault weapons" is somehow not evidence that they want to limit gun ownership?
 
2013-01-15 09:06:44 AM  

way south: The combination of President Obama's re-election and the Newtown massacre has caused gun proponents to stock up, fearing, against all available evidence, that the federal government was about to crack down on gun ownership.

I don't think anyone who's been following the news since last summer will question that a crackdown was (and now is) high on the presidents list of post election things to do.
I'm not sure which evidence this guy is seeing that goes against it.


How will Obama pass any gun control without support of Republicans in the House? Do you think republicans are likely to pass any meaningful control laws?
 
2013-01-15 09:07:44 AM  

way south: The combination of President Obama's re-election and the Newtown massacre has caused gun proponents to stock up, fearing, against all available evidence, that the federal government was about to crack down on gun ownership.

I don't think anyone who's been following the news since last summer will question that a crackdown was (and now is) high on the presidents list of post election things to do.
I'm not sure which evidence this guy is seeing that goes against it.


"Crackdown"? Literally nothing specific is on the table (other than Feinstein's thing which is not likely to actually be part of the offer/package). It's still being drafted.

I hear way too much lofty language about the President's Crackdowns and Bans for someone who hasn't done anything yet.
 
2013-01-15 09:08:46 AM  
Story: "How to spend two whole hours on a gun range and still be scared to death of guns and gun owners"


Hey subby -- did you accidentally write a headline for one article and link to a different one?

Tfa didn't really say a whole lot. It sounds like the author was underwhelmed by the experience, more than anything.
 
2013-01-15 09:09:20 AM  
It's about his comparison of the pro-gun argument as an emotional position to the anti-gun position as fact-based and rational. It's a clever trick to paint the other side as irrational but lovable bumpkins before forcing a policy "for their own good" on them since they certainly wouldn't agree to it on logical terms.
 
2013-01-15 09:10:02 AM  
If you get to take my guns in the name of your own safety, I get to take your freedoms of speech, religion and assembly.
Second amendment protects the first.
 
2013-01-15 09:10:12 AM  
On a side note for you New Yorkers.... 7 round mag capacity limit? W.T.F? I guess everyone will be carrying .45s now.

And 'one feature of a military style rifle' makes it an 'assault weapon'?

Ruger mini-14 that is not an assault rifle
t3.gstatic.com
Ruger mini-14 that IS an assault rifle
gunningforthetruth.files.wordpress.com
Because of a slight change in how you hold it.

Seriously, New York, W.T.F??
 
2013-01-15 09:10:36 AM  

LasersHurt: AdmirableSnackbar: LasersHurt: I love shooting, it's fun. Done it many times as a kid/young adult.

I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.

Yup. Holding a gun for a while and shooting it at a target doesn't automatically make you a paranoid, delusional asshole. But being a paranoid, delusional asshole makes you feel the need to own an arsenal and scream at anyone who questions your responsibility and/or sanity.

This. I am for the right to own guns, it's in the constitution, and as much as I hate having the arguments, guns don't actually kill - if you kept them locked up, unloaded, responsibly, they're pretty safe.

I have met way too many unhinged lunatics, however, who have every right to own an arsenal, to be "comfortable" with it. For many, the idea of the right outweighs the reality of it on the ground, and I can't agree with that.


Add to that the fact that any idiot can buy a firearm with no training or licensing...

It's been MANY years since I've been to a gun range, but the last time I was there I saw a guy who had just bought a new rifle...not sure what caliber since it's been so long (20 years). Just remember that it was black with a scope.

Anyway, I remember him showing it off, then getting ready to fire it for the first time...and I remember looking away when I saw him put his eye socket right up against the scope.
 
2013-01-15 09:10:48 AM  

Frank N Stein: joness0154: Frank N Stein: If you're an adult and no one has shown you how to shoot a gun, your parents failed you.

/inb4 picture of lanza

I wouldn't go that far, however I'd say that my father and grandfather taking me out into the woods on their property with an old Mossberg 46a .22 rifle and teaching me how to shoot was one of the better experiences of my life. I think I was 8 or 9 at the time.

In my opinion, the earlier one learns about firearms and firearm safety, the better.

Oh I agree. In my instance, shooting was in the context of hunting and more broadly outdoor activities in general. Growing up in the Chicago suburbs, I think I was the only kid in my group of friends that could hunt, clean a fish, start a fire without a match, identify edible mushrooms, identify flora and fauna, field strip and clean a gun, rig together shelter, right a tipped canoe etc... Basically boyscout type shiat

I just find it strange that so many of my fellow city-folk are so distant from any sort of self reliance, as if the veneer of civilization is impenituable and they're not one power outage away from having to their next meal from someplace other than McDonalds.


When the power goes out in the Chicago suburbs, there is so much potential for hunting, fishing and righting canoes.

Or maybe you meant several million people would move on foot to the west and rig up lean-tos. And subsist on small game and trout and mushrooms.

If you think your survival is not tied to the power staying on...good luck.
 
2013-01-15 09:11:28 AM  

manimal2878: ...has caused gun proponents to stock up, fearing, against all available evidence, that the federal government was about to crack down on gun ownership.

So NY banning guns,and people saying at the federal level we need to get rid of "assault weapons" is somehow not evidence that they want to limit gun ownership?


Yea, that NY gun ban won't hold up in court, at least the no grandfather clause. It is an ex post facto law and they are against the US Constitution.
 
2013-01-15 09:12:33 AM  

Carth: Guns are like an insurance policy for people who don't understand probability. Sure you unlikely to ever need your gun to defend you or your family, and sure your loved ones are more likely to die from a gun by just having one in your house but damn it no one better ever try to regulate them!


I'm unlikely to need a seat belt when I drive, but I still wear one.
I'm unlikely to fall out of a boat, but I still wear a life preserver.

There are three groups that support gun control: The government, liberals, and criminals... and the lines are starting to blur.
 
2013-01-15 09:12:47 AM  

rufus-t-firefly: LasersHurt: AdmirableSnackbar: LasersHurt: I love shooting, it's fun. Done it many times as a kid/young adult.

I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.

Yup. Holding a gun for a while and shooting it at a target doesn't automatically make you a paranoid, delusional asshole. But being a paranoid, delusional asshole makes you feel the need to own an arsenal and scream at anyone who questions your responsibility and/or sanity.

This. I am for the right to own guns, it's in the constitution, and as much as I hate having the arguments, guns don't actually kill - if you kept them locked up, unloaded, responsibly, they're pretty safe.

I have met way too many unhinged lunatics, however, who have every right to own an arsenal, to be "comfortable" with it. For many, the idea of the right outweighs the reality of it on the ground, and I can't agree with that.

Add to that the fact that any idiot can buy a firearm with no training or licensing...

It's been MANY years since I've been to a gun range, but the last time I was there I saw a guy who had just bought a new rifle...not sure what caliber since it's been so long (20 years). Just remember that it was black with a scope.

Anyway, I remember him showing it off, then getting ready to fire it for the first time...and I remember looking away when I saw him put his eye socket right up against the scope.


I'd be WAY less worried if the Well Regulated Militia part meant that these guys spent a weekend a month doing PT and gun training/safety. There's something about that little bit of extra structure that tends to reign in/weed out the total nutbars.
 
2013-01-15 09:13:31 AM  

Securitywyrm: There are three groups that support gun control: The government, liberals, and criminals... and the lines are starting to blur.


Oh how clever this has totally changed the argument I am now on your side and also vote Republican HA HA HA HA
 
2013-01-15 09:14:25 AM  
The target was a bright green human silhouette. Gena and I took turns shooting. It took awhile, but once I got the hang of it, I stopped worrying about the shape of the target and focused on hitting it.

Way to put your big girl panties on and deal with it, Joe
 
2013-01-15 09:15:35 AM  

GAT_00: Elvis_Bogart: Xenophobic old fruit.

Ah, the voice of respectful debate.


Yeah, the small penised cry baby sister farking rednecks really need to watch their tone.
 
2013-01-15 09:15:38 AM  

Securitywyrm: There are three groups that support gun control: The government, liberals, and criminals... and the lines are starting to blur.


i47.tinypic.com
 
2013-01-15 09:15:43 AM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: That article basically said "I decided to try this out, didn't care for it, but the people I talked to were helpful and perfectly nice folks with opinions that differ from my own".

The response from the "responsible guns owners" of Fark so far boils down to "latte-sipping ivory tower hateful liberal scum STFU blaaarrrrgggh GATLING GUN!!"

But, no, I can't imagine why so many people view "responsible gun owners" as unhinged, rabid maniacs... surely there's just no reason at all for it.


Agreed. The article seemed to be more about experiencing a shooting range with a few gun owners and ultimately not agreeing with or disapproving of their attitude.
 
2013-01-15 09:15:58 AM  

MythDragon: On a side note for you New Yorkers.... 7 round mag capacity limit? W.T.F? I guess everyone will be carrying .45s now.

And 'one feature of a military style rifle' makes it an 'assault weapon'?

Ruger mini-14 that is not an assault rifle
[t3.gstatic.com image 339x116]
Ruger mini-14 that IS an assault rifle
[gunningforthetruth.files.wordpress.com image 400x100]
Because of a slight change in how you hold it.

Seriously, New York, W.T.F??



Who cares? Why is this held up as such a terrible law? What harm does it do, aside from interfere with peoples' hobbies?
 
2013-01-15 09:16:01 AM  

rufus-t-firefly: LasersHurt: AdmirableSnackbar: LasersHurt: I love shooting, it's fun. Done it many times as a kid/young adult.

I'm still scared of gun owners, I've talked to them.

Yup. Holding a gun for a while and shooting it at a target doesn't automatically make you a paranoid, delusional asshole. But being a paranoid, delusional asshole makes you feel the need to own an arsenal and scream at anyone who questions your responsibility and/or sanity.

This. I am for the right to own guns, it's in the constitution, and as much as I hate having the arguments, guns don't actually kill - if you kept them locked up, unloaded, responsibly, they're pretty safe.

I have met way too many unhinged lunatics, however, who have every right to own an arsenal, to be "comfortable" with it. For many, the idea of the right outweighs the reality of it on the ground, and I can't agree with that.

Add to that the fact that any idiot can buy a firearm with no training or licensing...

It's been MANY years since I've been to a gun range, but the last time I was there I saw a guy who had just bought a new rifle...not sure what caliber since it's been so long (20 years). Just remember that it was black with a scope.

Anyway, I remember him showing it off, then getting ready to fire it for the first time...and I remember looking away when I saw him put his eye socket right up against the scope.


Any requirement for training or proof of being a responsible gun owner (or at least a likely responsible gun owner) is tyranny and oppression. And Tebow forbid you suggest registration of any gun, because that apparently must be immediately followed by confiscation of all firearms.

These people are not right in the head.
 
2013-01-15 09:16:09 AM  

Ivandrago: MeinRS6: There is probably no one at the NYTimes that is qualified to say anything about guns - ever.

They can review lattes and bagels, but the NYTimes needs to STFU when it comes to guns. They don't have the slightest clue.

Can they review the arts? Restaurants? Fashion? Why would I read the Times for a gun review. That's why I read Guns & Ammo or Handguns. What makes one qualified to talk about guns? I was disappointed he used the blanket term "assault weapon" as if it was some sort of description, but at least he tried. Shooting is a violent act and it's not for everyone. He brought the perspective of one who doesn't shoot, doesn't like to shoot, and doesn't understand why people like to shoot. I don't see anything wrong with at least trying.


Where does this Talking Point myth come from? There is a definition of what an assault weapon is. It's typically included in the laws restricting them, and will vary from state to state, but there is a clear definition and presumably someone in New York would be using New York's definition:

The legislation, called the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, or NYSAFE, now defines an assault weapon as any having detachable magazines and one military-style feature, instead of two.

I believe some of the military-style features are a collapsible stock and a pistol grip.
 
2013-01-15 09:16:12 AM  

Securitywyrm: Carth: Guns are like an insurance policy for people who don't understand probability. Sure you unlikely to ever need your gun to defend you or your family, and sure your loved ones are more likely to die from a gun by just having one in your house but damn it no one better ever try to regulate them!

I'm unlikely to need a seat belt when I drive, but I still wear one.
I'm unlikely to fall out of a boat, but I still wear a life preserver.

There are three groups that support gun control: The government, liberals, and criminals... and the lines are starting to blur.


Your odds of dying from a car/boating accident decrease when wearing a seat-belt/life preserver. Your odds of dying from a fire arm increase when owning a gun.
 
2013-01-15 09:16:28 AM  
Shooting is fun.

But if I could, I'd melt every gun on earth into scrap.
 
Displayed 50 of 381 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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