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.

(Examiner)   Alex Jones claims Obama has met the rules of impeachment under Article II, Section IV of the Constitution; fortunately for everyone else, Jones seems to have skipped Article I, Section III   (examiner.com) divider line 189
    More: Dumbass, President Obama, articles of impeachment, Constitution of the United States, Andrew Johnson, hair removal, impeachment, veto override  
•       •       •

4783 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Jan 2013 at 9:08 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-01-16 02:28:02 AM  
Ah yes, an online petition from Alex Jones. That'll carry a lot of weight. Next up, a bill to make Facebook 'likes' legally binding. That'll get him.
 
2013-01-16 03:30:04 AM  
Submitter seems to have skipped Article VI, Section XII, which says "those who provide taxation without representation" are not allowed to be president, and "the Founding Fathers are rolling in their grave at the sight of this Taxbongo".
 
2013-01-16 04:42:58 AM  
I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.
 
2013-01-16 08:35:11 AM  

Mike_LowELL: Submitter seems to have skipped Article VI, Section XII, which says "those who provide taxation without representation" are not allowed to be president, and "the Founding Fathers are rolling in their grave at the sight of this Taxbongo".


LOL
 
2013-01-16 09:04:58 AM  

DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.


James Garfield.

Hard to fark things up too badly when you're only in office for 6 months.
 
2013-01-16 09:06:40 AM  
Good luck with that.
 
2013-01-16 09:10:44 AM  

dittybopper: DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.

James Garfield.

Hard to fark things up too badly when you're only in office for 6 months.


William Henry Harrison.
 
2013-01-16 09:12:16 AM  

Mike_LowELL: Submitter seems to have skipped Article VI, Section XII, which says "those who provide taxation without representation" are not allowed to be president, and "the Founding Fathers are rolling in their grave at the sight of this Taxbongo".


I thought you were crazy, then I went to a constitution website, used CTRL-F and entered "Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at the sight of this Taxbongo" and... there it was.

You learn something new every day.
 
2013-01-16 09:18:48 AM  

WSUCanuck: dittybopper: DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.

James Garfield.

Hard to fark things up too badly when you're only in office for 6 months.

William Henry Harrison.


No actually, Harrison farked a chicken on stage during his inaugural speech and that's how he caught the AIDS that killed him a month later.


/The more you know.jpg
 
2013-01-16 09:18:53 AM  

I_Am_Weasel: Mike_LowELL: Submitter seems to have skipped Article VI, Section XII, which says "those who provide taxation without representation" are not allowed to be president, and "the Founding Fathers are rolling in their grave at the sight of this Taxbongo".

I thought you were crazy, then I went to a constitution website, used CTRL-F and entered "Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at the sight of this Taxbongo" and... there it was.

You learn something new every day.


Yes. The founding fathers dreamed of a semi-literate society of morbidly obese gun hicks.
 
2013-01-16 09:20:00 AM  
In today's linked article, we learn that a bitter and delusional man is attempting a petty revenge against the president that the president will never even hear about, let alone be affected by.

Wow. This is some New York Times-level sh*t right there.
 
2013-01-16 09:22:47 AM  
empirestrikesblack.com

Obama's escape vehicle from the Articles of Impeachment.
 
2013-01-16 09:24:46 AM  
I thought the impeachment against Clinton was bs. however I would not have wanted a Rmoney presidency but if he banned any firearms by executive order, I would not be sad to see him impeached and convicted.
 
2013-01-16 09:24:54 AM  
who the hell is andrew johnson?

/impeach everyone
 
2013-01-16 09:25:16 AM  

WSUCanuck: dittybopper: DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.

James Garfield.

Hard to fark things up too badly when you're only in office for 6 months.

William Henry Harrison.


Crap. That's who I was thinking of. Garfield was actually my second choice, I couldn't remember Harrison.
 
2013-01-16 09:25:47 AM  
i1.kym-cdn.com

/eating babies
 
2013-01-16 09:28:19 AM  
I predict every Republican House will impeach every Democratic president who is re-elected to a second term.
 
2013-01-16 09:28:21 AM  

Whiskey Pete: I_Am_Weasel: Mike_LowELL: Submitter seems to have skipped Article VI, Section XII, which says "those who provide taxation without representation" are not allowed to be president, and "the Founding Fathers are rolling in their grave at the sight of this Taxbongo".

I thought you were crazy, then I went to a constitution website, used CTRL-F and entered "Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at the sight of this Taxbongo" and... there it was.

You learn something new every day.

Yes. The founding fathers dreamed of a semi-literate society of morbidly obese gun hicks.


Just to put that in graphical representation:

These Guys:

pakistanisforpeace.files.wordpress.com

Are Very Proud of These Guys:

4.bp.blogspot.com

And who wouldn't be?

"P
A
T

R


I

O


T


I

C

DESCENDING!"
 
2013-01-16 09:28:38 AM  
will someone please rip this guys jaw off
 
2013-01-16 09:29:00 AM  
Alex Jones Claims....

Stopped reading right there. Anything with that name and the word "claims" should tell you it's grade A Bullshiat, Mostly Circus Animal no Filler.
 
2013-01-16 09:30:07 AM  

apacheco: will someone please rip this guys jaw off


Who would dare to? He'd surely try to eat your hand.
 
2013-01-16 09:30:32 AM  

kudayta: WSUCanuck: dittybopper: DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.

James Garfield.

Hard to fark things up too badly when you're only in office for 6 months.

William Henry Harrison.

No actually, Harrison farked a chicken on stage during his inaugural speech and that's how he caught the AIDS that killed him a month later.


/The more you know.jpg


I didn't know there were Republicans back in the 1840s. The more you know indeed.
 
2013-01-16 09:31:13 AM  
Jones also skipped the day that God was handing out sanity.
 
2013-01-16 09:31:14 AM  

BronyMedic: Alex Jones Claims....

Stopped reading right there. Anything with that name and the word "claims" should tell you it's grade A Bullshiat, Mostly Circus Animal no Filler.


If Alex Jones said the sun was going to rise in the east I would make sure my western shades were closed so the sun wouldn't wake me up in the morning.
 
2013-01-16 09:31:46 AM  

Koalaesq: apacheco: will someone please rip this guys jaw off

Who would dare to? He'd surely try to eat your hand.


You have to pick him up by grasping his shell right behind his head so he can't get you. Like alligator snapping turtles.
 
2013-01-16 09:32:03 AM  

Bigdogdaddy: I thought the impeachment against Clinton was bs. however I would not have wanted a Rmoney presidency but if he banned any firearms by executive order, I would not be sad to see him impeached and convicted.


Translation: Assault weapons highest form of patriotic.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-01-16 09:32:57 AM  
The party that are "physical conservatives" are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars by forcing a senate trial that can't possibly go anywhere because it's initiated only because they don't like him.

Stop calling the GOP conservative. It's total bullshiat.
 
2013-01-16 09:33:02 AM  

BronyMedic: Alex Jones Claims....

Stopped reading right there. Anything with that name and the word "claims" should tell you it's grade A Bullshiat, Mostly Circus Animal no Filler.


He claims the Bilderbergs eat human babies wrapped in gold.  I don't know how anyone can take him seriously on anything if he believes that.

/didn't miss your ref, Epoch_Zero
 
2013-01-16 09:35:08 AM  
Speaking of both Presidents who have had Articles of Impeachment passed against them: Interestingly, both presidents were Democrats and, in both cases, impeachment proceedings were initiated by a Republican-controlled House in a highly-polarized political environment.

Interesting, but not surprising.
 
2013-01-16 09:36:17 AM  

d23: The party that are "physical conservatives" are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars by forcing a senate trial that can't possibly go anywhere because it's initiated only because they don't like him.

Stop calling the GOP conservative. It's total bullshiat.


Eh. It won't even get that far; without some actual wrongdoing (even though the investigation was politically motivated bullshiat, Clinton did commit perjury) they'll never get enough Democrats to reach the two-thirds vote requirement for articles of impeachment.
 
2013-01-16 09:36:27 AM  

Epoch_Zero: Koalaesq: apacheco: will someone please rip this guys jaw off

Who would dare to? He'd surely try to eat your hand.

You have to pick him up by grasping his shell right behind his head so he can't get you. Like alligator snapping turtles.


i was thinking of holding him by his legs like a chicken. You ever see a cock fight? those claws can cut you up
 
2013-01-16 09:37:07 AM  

DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.


Andrew Johnson?
 
2013-01-16 09:37:49 AM  

thurstonxhowell: Speaking of both Presidents who have had Articles of Impeachment passed against them: Interestingly, both presidents were Democrats and, in both cases, impeachment proceedings were initiated by a Republican-controlled House in a highly-polarized political environment.

Interesting, but not surprising.


You realize that the ideologies of the parties have basically switched since then, right? I mean, don't get me wrong, I would love to besmirch the name of the GOP every minute of every day and from every corner of this country, but your statement - it doesn't mean what you think it means.
 
2013-01-16 09:41:45 AM  

WSUCanuck: dittybopper: DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.

James Garfield.

Hard to fark things up too badly when you're only in office for 6 months.

William Henry Harrison.


cdn.uproxx.com
 
2013-01-16 09:41:49 AM  
Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."
 
2013-01-16 09:43:55 AM  
I'm glad Alex Jones got the ball rolling on this. Now the media can stop talk about Grover Norquist setting the agenda for the Rederplicans and start talking about this raving lunatic setting the agenda for them.

Rederps not policing their own is making this easy.
 
2013-01-16 09:46:15 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."


What a totally confident gun lobby with legally sound positions does when it's totally confident and just being attacked by opportunist anti-gun zealots does, you guys.
 
2013-01-16 09:47:54 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."


Wrong thread, asshole
 
2013-01-16 09:48:24 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."


Would you prefer that we listen to Wayne Lapierre when he tell us gun owners cannot be trusted to follow gun laws and that they pose such a grave threat that every school in the country must be provided with armed guards to protect the children from gun owners?
 
2013-01-16 09:49:53 AM  

Epoch_Zero: What a totally confident gun lobby with legally sound positions does when it's totally confident and just being attacked by opportunist anti-gun zealots does, you guys.


Oh, I was so hoping that disgusting thing would come up today.

With all their money, you'd think the NRA would have better strategists.  That thing is pure, blinding propaganda.  Offensive, low-information, bottom-feeding political ads aspire be that ad.
 
2013-01-16 09:53:11 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."

Would you prefer that we listen to Wayne Lapierre when he tell us gun owners cannot be trusted to follow gun laws and that they pose such a grave threat that every school in the country must be provided with armed guards to protect the children from gun owners?


Mass shootings are fairly rare, though they do get a lot of media attention. Many of my fellow lefties have gun control as a pet issue and enjoy nothing more than standing on the bodies of dead kids so they can push their pet agenda. The rest who hop onto the band wagon during the media blitz are just useful idiots.
 
2013-01-16 09:53:21 AM  

Diogenes: BronyMedic: Alex Jones Claims....

Stopped reading right there. Anything with that name and the word "claims" should tell you it's grade A Bullshiat, Mostly Circus Animal no Filler.

He claims the Bilderbergs eat human babies wrapped in gold.  I don't know how anyone can take him seriously on anything if he believes that.

/didn't miss your ref, Epoch_Zero


They guy must be a nutter. No mention of barbecue sauce?
 
2013-01-16 09:53:57 AM  

Epoch_Zero: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."

What a totally confident gun lobby with legally sound positions does when it's totally confident and just being attacked by opportunist anti-gun zealots does, you guys.


And? You do realize that there were armed guards at that school before the secret service got there, right? Not every student's parent has access to launch codes. So if allowing guns in schools provides no additional safety over gun free zones, and the presence of guns only leads to an increased chance of innocents being shot, as gun control advocates would have us believe, then why would Obama send his kids to a school with such "backwards" thinking? Pointing out hypocrisy is a fair tactic.
 
2013-01-16 09:54:12 AM  
....so....they finally acknowledge he was elected?
 
2013-01-16 09:55:07 AM  

Saiga410: They guy must be a nutter. No mention of barbecue sauce?


Honestly.  Like them or hate them, the Bilderbergs aren't heathens.
 
2013-01-16 09:55:10 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."

Would you prefer that we listen to Wayne Lapierre when he tell us gun owners cannot be trusted to follow gun laws and that they pose such a grave threat that every school in the country must be provided with armed guards to protect the children from gun owners?

Mass shootings are fairly rare, though they do get a lot of media attention. Many of my fellow lefties have gun control as a pet issue and enjoy nothing more than standing on the bodies of dead kids so they can push their pet agenda. The rest who hop onto the band wagon during the media blitz are just useful idiots.


Wayme Lapierre is a lefty now?
 
2013-01-16 09:55:45 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Mass shootings are fairly rare, though they do get a lot of media attention. Many of my fellow lefties have gun control as a pet issue and enjoy nothing more than standing on the bodies of dead kids so they can push their pet agenda. The rest who hop onto the band wagon during the media blitz are just useful idiots.


"Pushing your pet agenda" sounds like a euphemism for something very naughty.
 
2013-01-16 09:56:19 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Fail in Human Form: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."

Would you prefer that we listen to Wayne Lapierre when he tell us gun owners cannot be trusted to follow gun laws and that they pose such a grave threat that every school in the country must be provided with armed guards to protect the children from gun owners?

Mass shootings are fairly rare, though they do get a lot of media attention. Many of my fellow lefties have gun control as a pet issue and enjoy nothing more than standing on the bodies of dead kids so they can push their pet agenda. The rest who hop onto the band wagon during the media blitz are just useful idiots.

Wayme Lapierre is a lefty now?


The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.
 
2013-01-16 09:56:30 AM  

JAMES YEAGER (1/9/2013): fark that. I'm telling you that if that happens, it's going to spark a Civil War, and I'll be glad to fire the first shot. ... I'm not farking putting up with this, I'm not letting my country be ruled by a dictator, I'm not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I'm going to start killing people!


Link

Gun owners are so sane and rational.
 
2013-01-16 09:59:17 AM  

Lost Thought 00: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."

Wrong thread, asshole


It's the right thread. This is about your obsession with Alex Jones and your attempt to poison the well, and use every underhanded debate tactic available, such as yours.

Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."

Would you prefer that we listen to Wayne Lapierre when he tell us gun owners cannot be trusted to follow gun laws and that they pose such a grave threat that every school in the country must be provided with armed guards to protect the children from gun owners?


Care to provide a source for that quote? Sounds like you're pretending he said something he did not.
 
2013-01-16 10:00:34 AM  

Fail in Human Form: The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.


Yes, blame THE MEDIA for reporting on 26 dead schoolkids. Non-issue; didn't deserve all that coverage. It was just manufactured outrage; no normal person really cared about the dead kids or wanted gun control change because of it. All the media's fault.

Keep telling yourself these little lies if they make you feel better.
 
2013-01-16 10:01:18 AM  

NateGrey: JAMES YEAGER (1/9/2013): fark that. I'm telling you that if that happens, it's going to spark a Civil War, and I'll be glad to fire the first shot. ... I'm not farking putting up with this, I'm not letting my country be ruled by a dictator, I'm not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I'm going to start killing people!

Link

Gun owners are so sane and rational.


BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well.

 
2013-01-16 10:01:50 AM  

NateGrey: JAMES YEAGER (1/9/2013): fark that. I'm telling you that if that happens, it's going to spark a Civil War, and I'll be glad to fire the first shot. ... I'm not farking putting up with this, I'm not letting my country be ruled by a dictator, I'm not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I'm going to start killing people!

Link

Gun owners are so sane and rational.


Some are. Some are assholes.
 
2013-01-16 10:02:03 AM  
FTFA: " Short of a major bombshell revelation, any impeachment proceeding would likely be viewed by most Americans as an exercise in both political bitterness by Republicans, and paranoia by conspiracy theorists."
 
2013-01-16 10:02:05 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Would you prefer that we listen to Wayne Lapierre when he tell us gun owners cannot be trusted to follow gun laws and that they pose such a grave threat that every school in the country must be provided with armed guards to protect the children from gun owners?

Care to provide a source for that quote? Sounds like you're pretending he said something he did not.


Cherry picked. He said that gun owners were not to be trusted to follow gun laws, not just in general. Although if someone has a house with weapons mounted all over the walls, I wouldn't ask them to watch my kids.
 
2013-01-16 10:03:18 AM  

Koalaesq: Fail in Human Form: The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.

Yes, blame THE MEDIA for reporting on 26 dead schoolkids. Non-issue; didn't deserve all that coverage. It was just manufactured outrage; no normal person really cared about the dead kids or wanted gun control change because of it. All the media's fault.

Keep telling yourself these little lies if they make you feel better.


There's a difference between reporting on and having wall to wall coverage that promotes their agenda. Don't believe me? Look at all the other causes of death, or legitimate defensive uses of firearms, and see how much media coverage they get.
 
2013-01-16 10:03:32 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Philip Francis Queeg: Fail in Human Form: Philip Francis Queeg: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."

Would you prefer that we listen to Wayne Lapierre when he tell us gun owners cannot be trusted to follow gun laws and that they pose such a grave threat that every school in the country must be provided with armed guards to protect the children from gun owners?

Mass shootings are fairly rare, though they do get a lot of media attention. Many of my fellow lefties have gun control as a pet issue and enjoy nothing more than standing on the bodies of dead kids so they can push their pet agenda. The rest who hop onto the band wagon during the media blitz are just useful idiots.

Wayme Lapierre is a lefty now?

The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.


Yes the violent deaths of 20 first graders shouldn't be news at all. The NRA should have maintained their silence until Lanza was officially inducted into the "Cold Dead Hands" Hall of Fame later this year.
 
2013-01-16 10:03:35 AM  

Fail in Human Form:
The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.

8/10. You'll get some good bites on that one
 
2013-01-16 10:06:11 AM  

Bigdogdaddy: Fail in Human Form:
The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.
8/10. You'll get some good bites on that one


Not trolling, I believe exactly what I say.
 
2013-01-16 10:06:14 AM  
I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?
 
2013-01-16 10:06:58 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Koalaesq: Fail in Human Form: The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.

Yes, blame THE MEDIA for reporting on 26 dead schoolkids. Non-issue; didn't deserve all that coverage. It was just manufactured outrage; no normal person really cared about the dead kids or wanted gun control change because of it. All the media's fault.

Keep telling yourself these little lies if they make you feel better.

There's a difference between reporting on and having wall to wall coverage that promotes their agenda. Don't believe me? Look at all the other causes of death, or legitimate defensive uses of firearms, and see how much media coverage they get.


All of those other national tragedies where kindergartners were mowed down? Apples, Oranges, etc. Troll harder.
 
2013-01-16 10:07:29 AM  

Fail in Human Form: There's a difference between reporting on and having wall to wall coverage that promotes their agenda. Don't believe me? Look at all the other causes of death, or legitimate defensive uses of firearms, and see how much media coverage they get.


I wouldn't be so quick to attribute an agenda to it when the more plausible reason is a deeply flawed news media in general.  Sensationalism sells.  And that story sold itself.  It was far more interesting and shocking to the mass audience than a discussion about Chicago's ridiculous rate of gun deaths.  Or the horrors occurring in Syria.  Or the consequences of a coup in Pakistan.  Or...
 
2013-01-16 10:07:47 AM  

someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?


He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.
 
2013-01-16 10:07:48 AM  
Yeah, um, no. I'd actually support criminalizing the introduction of blatantly unconstitutional legislation, or taking blatantly unconstitutional executive action. But at this particular point in time, neither of those is a crime, and without a crime there is no grounds for impeachment.

As it turns out, there are very few Presidents or folks in Congress, past or present, who would have avoided being nailed by such legislation. Washington might have managed, but even his immediate successor fails. This does not mean that these actions should not be made criminal; one could, in fact, argue that it signals the opposite. But in any event it's worth acknowledging that we have a big problem with lawmakers failing to respect, you know, the law.
 
2013-01-16 10:09:06 AM  

Diogenes: Fail in Human Form: There's a difference between reporting on and having wall to wall coverage that promotes their agenda. Don't believe me? Look at all the other causes of death, or legitimate defensive uses of firearms, and see how much media coverage they get.

I wouldn't be so quick to attribute an agenda to it when the more plausible reason is a deeply flawed news media in general.  Sensationalism sells.  And that story sold itself.  It was far more interesting and shocking to the mass audience than a discussion about Chicago's ridiculous rate of gun deaths.  Or the horrors occurring in Syria.  Or the consequences of a coup in Pakistan.  Or...


I'll grant you that, but look at all the other issues I mentioned that kill more people (in total) than one incident that rarely get a mention.
 
2013-01-16 10:09:46 AM  

Fail in Human Form: The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation,


lulz
 
2013-01-16 10:10:04 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position."


Fark JUST had an article saying that a gun was 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder. Bam! There's your fact and/or statistic. You're welcome.

The truth is, most people are far too stupid to be trusted with lethal weaponry. We have to put warning labels on bleach saying "Do not drink". It's BLEACH! The absolute mind-boggling stupidity of the average person can never be overstated. That is what scares gun control proponents, that the gigantic force of 250 million+ complete idiots living in America having weapons of such power is dangerous to the other 50 million of us.

What needs to be done is requiring a license to own a gun, that must be renewed every year. In America we require driving licenses to drive (although those need renewing as well). We also require a license renewed every single year to perform CPR, which is so easy to perform that most children can pull it off after watching it on TV. If we can require people to get certified as smart enough to CPR, then we can require people to prove that they can be trusted with instant death in the palms of their hands.

PS: Amusingly enough, I'm also in favor of arming teachers. My mother grew up in Chicago, with armed teachers, and nobody tried a goddamn thing there. There's never been an inner-city school shooting. There's a reason for that. "Gun-Free zone" is codeword for "Defenseless".
 
2013-01-16 10:10:38 AM  

Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.


You didn't answer my question.
 
2013-01-16 10:10:46 AM  

Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.


Maybe perhaps because HE has an agenda.

If I'm looking for a voice of advocacy for gun rights, I'm not looking to him.
 
2013-01-16 10:13:13 AM  

someonelse: Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.

You didn't answer my question.


He's more aggressive in his call to resistance than the NRA is

Diogenes: Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.

Maybe perhaps because HE has an agenda.

If I'm looking for a voice of advocacy for gun rights, I'm not looking to him.


Understandable, but when is it ok to "get mad"?
 
2013-01-16 10:13:49 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Not trolling, I believe exactly what I say.


Except that the scolding preposterous response from the NRA made the media's gibberish look like the work of a Rhodes Scholar. I think even a cursory look at the issue, especially as it relates to the recent school shooting(s), suggests that there aren't a lot of mainstream media voices from either side of the issue making a ton of sense.

It's been a pure withdrawal into tired rhetoric from both sides, and neither one has a chance of being the "solution" to a problem that probably has more cultural causes than legislative ones.
 
2013-01-16 10:15:38 AM  

Mercutio74: Fail in Human Form: Not trolling, I believe exactly what I say.

Except that the scolding preposterous response from the NRA made the media's gibberish look like the work of a Rhodes Scholar. I think even a cursory look at the issue, especially as it relates to the recent school shooting(s), suggests that there aren't a lot of mainstream media voices from either side of the issue making a ton of sense.

It's been a pure withdrawal into tired rhetoric from both sides, and neither one has a chance of being the "solution" to a problem that probably has more cultural causes than legislative ones.


That's because the NRA has refused to let people use this tragedy to force them into "giving in". If I feel I've given up far to much already, and you cry for more, what's left to fill time on the 24/7 news channels other than rhetoric?
 
2013-01-16 10:17:24 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Understandable, but when is it ok to "get mad"?


From a PR standpoint, related to this issue... it will never be ok to "get mad". The last thing the gun lobby should want is for any spokesman (official or not) to appear to be anything but calm and reasonable.

As a group of individuals that wishes to maintain laws that allow lethal weapons to be readily available to the general public, you cannot appear out of control of your own emotions. Angry people are far more likely to do violence to their fellow man than calm and reasonable people. This is basic stuff.
 
2013-01-16 10:18:10 AM  

Koalaesq: In today's linked article, we learn that a bitter and delusional man is attempting a petty revenge against the president that the president will never even hear about, let alone be affected by.

Wow. This is some New York Times-level sh*t right there.


Partially true, but Alex Jones is more of a huckster snake-oil charlatan taking money from bitter and delusional men.
 
2013-01-16 10:18:42 AM  

Insaniteus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position."

Fark JUST had an article saying that a gun was 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder. Bam! There's your fact and/or statistic. You're welcome.


That statistic was shown to be untrue in that thread.

Insaniteus: The truth is, most people are far too stupid to be trusted with lethal weaponry.


Considering the fact that there's about 200,000,000 people in this country who have access to guns, and we only have 12,000 gun deaths, most of which are gang related and many with illegally obtained guns, MOST people are very responsible with their guns. In fact, those who aren't are a minuscule minority relatively speaking.

Insaniteus: What needs to be done is requiring a license to own a gun, that must be renewed every year.


I see no reason why that would make anyone safer.

Insaniteus: PS: Amusingly enough, I'm also in favor of arming teachers. My mother grew up in Chicago, with armed teachers, and nobody tried a goddamn thing there. There's never been an inner-city school shooting. There's a reason for that. "Gun-Free zone" is codeword for "Defenseless".


I'm not in favor of arming teachers, but I think they shouldn't be forbidden from being armed. It should be their choice.
 
2013-01-16 10:19:24 AM  

Fail in Human Form: That's because the NRA has refused to let people use this tragedy to force them into "giving in". If I feel I've given up far to much already, and you cry for more, what's left to fill time on the 24/7 news channels other than rhetoric?


I understand that that would be their goal. But that press conference was an exercise in tone deaf hubris.
 
2013-01-16 10:22:59 AM  

InmanRoshi: Koalaesq: In today's linked article, we learn that a bitter and delusional man is attempting a petty revenge against the president that the president will never even hear about, let alone be affected by.

Wow. This is some New York Times-level sh*t right there.

Partially true, but Alex Jones is more of a huckster snake-oil charlatan taking money from bitter and delusional men.


I dunno, you might be right, but I think these guys end up believing their own lies after a while. They feed into their own psychosis, as it were
 
2013-01-16 10:24:20 AM  
I'm so proud of the GOP! This time it'll work! Unlike 1996 and the election rout after!
 
2013-01-16 10:25:10 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Understandable, but when is it ok to "get mad"?


That's a much broader question.  All I can say is if I'm mad, and I want people to know it and take me seriously, I will try to use a voice or look to another voice that can be taken seriously.  In all things, if you want to get traction on an issue, you have to be heard by the people who don't share your opinion.

More specific to the topic at hand, that's why I just don't understand the NRA's strategy here.
 
2013-01-16 10:25:50 AM  
These people are going to get much more violent soon, aren't they?
 
2013-01-16 10:29:14 AM  

Mercutio74: From a PR standpoint, related to this issue... it will never be ok to "get mad". The last thing the gun lobby should want is for any spokesman (official or not) to appear to be anything but calm and reasonable.


The NRA makes its millions from memberships and donations. Their whole business model is to appeal to the "low information" demographic, and stoke their fears. They're not worried about losing the memberships of moderate, non-insane gun owners, because where else are those people gonna go? But they can draw in new money by trying to get more and more idiots scared enough of jack-booted government gun-takers that they'll open their wallets.
 
2013-01-16 10:30:27 AM  

someonelse: Mercutio74: From a PR standpoint, related to this issue... it will never be ok to "get mad". The last thing the gun lobby should want is for any spokesman (official or not) to appear to be anything but calm and reasonable.

The NRA makes its millions from memberships and donations. Their whole business model is to appeal to the "low information" demographic, and stoke their fears. They're not worried about losing the memberships of moderate, non-insane gun owners, because where else are those people gonna go? But they can draw in new money by trying to get more and more idiots scared enough of jack-booted government gun-takers that they'll open their wallets.


Ooops, I forgot to point out the similarity to Jones's business model.
 
2013-01-16 10:30:27 AM  

Smashed Hat: That'll carry a lot of weight. Next up, a bill to make Facebook 'likes' legally binding


i.imgur.com

Fartbongo better watch. Alex Jones and his friends from Cobra Kai are going to take him down, man!
 
2013-01-16 10:32:45 AM  
Well the Birth Certificate didn't go anywhere, Benghazi was a non-starter, and Romney was a bust. Time to pull something else out of their asses.
 
2013-01-16 10:34:00 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Koalaesq: Fail in Human Form: The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.

Yes, blame THE MEDIA for reporting on 26 dead schoolkids. Non-issue; didn't deserve all that coverage. It was just manufactured outrage; no normal person really cared about the dead kids or wanted gun control change because of it. All the media's fault.

Keep telling yourself these little lies if they make you feel better.

There's a difference between reporting on and having wall to wall coverage that promotes their agenda. Don't believe me? Look at all the other causes of death, or legitimate defensive uses of firearms, and see how much media coverage they get.


You're right. I'm sickened by the fact that the media refuses to cover the 20 people who died in a mass killing where the killer just used soup spoons. Because soup spoons are tools in the exact same way that guns are tools....TOOLS OF THE DEAD! But then again, we don't ban soup spoons from schools, so maybe that's why there have not been any soup spoon mass killings recently. But you would think that since every school has soup spoons (and I bet some cafeteria workers probably are carrying concealed soup spoons) that those very same soup spoons would prevent mass killings by other tools...like football-helment shaped eraser mass killings.

Stupid liberal media.
 
2013-01-16 10:36:24 AM  

snowshovel: Fail in Human Form: Koalaesq: Fail in Human Form: The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.

Yes, blame THE MEDIA for reporting on 26 dead schoolkids. Non-issue; didn't deserve all that coverage. It was just manufactured outrage; no normal person really cared about the dead kids or wanted gun control change because of it. All the media's fault.

Keep telling yourself these little lies if they make you feel better.

There's a difference between reporting on and having wall to wall coverage that promotes their agenda. Don't believe me? Look at all the other causes of death, or legitimate defensive uses of firearms, and see how much media coverage they get.

You're right. I'm sickened by the fact that the media refuses to cover the 20 people who died in a mass killing where the killer just used soup spoons. Because soup spoons are tools in the exact same way that guns are tools....TOOLS OF THE DEAD! But then again, we don't ban soup spoons from schools, so maybe that's why there have not been any soup spoon mass killings recently. But you would think that since every school has soup spoons (and I bet some cafeteria workers probably are carrying concealed soup spoons) that those very same soup spoons would prevent mass killings by other tools...like football-helment shaped eraser mass killings.

Stupid liberal media.


I think I love you
 
2013-01-16 10:37:22 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: we only have 12,000 gun deaths, most of which are gang related and many with illegally obtained guns, MOST people are very responsible with their guns. In fact, those who aren't are a minuscule minority relatively speaking.


upload.wikimedia.org

Gee,where have I heard this misleading bullshiat before?
 
2013-01-16 10:39:02 AM  
Alex Jones claims...

Yeah, stopped right there. This guy is a farking idiot and couldn't care less what he has to say about anything.
 
2013-01-16 10:39:16 AM  

snowshovel: Fail in Human Form: Koalaesq: Fail in Human Form: The NRA didn't say a word after the shooting, until the media went full retard and they had to respond. The NRA isn't the group that writes its legislation, gleefully, in the blood of the dead before the bodies are even cold.

Yes, blame THE MEDIA for reporting on 26 dead schoolkids. Non-issue; didn't deserve all that coverage. It was just manufactured outrage; no normal person really cared about the dead kids or wanted gun control change because of it. All the media's fault.

Keep telling yourself these little lies if they make you feel better.

There's a difference between reporting on and having wall to wall coverage that promotes their agenda. Don't believe me? Look at all the other causes of death, or legitimate defensive uses of firearms, and see how much media coverage they get.

You're right. I'm sickened by the fact that the media refuses to cover the 20 people who died in a mass killing where the killer just used soup spoons. Because soup spoons are tools in the exact same way that guns are tools....TOOLS OF THE DEAD! But then again, we don't ban soup spoons from schools, so maybe that's why there have not been any soup spoon mass killings recently. But you would think that since every school has soup spoons (and I bet some cafeteria workers probably are carrying concealed soup spoons) that those very same soup spoons would prevent mass killings by other tools...like football-helment shaped eraser mass killings.

Stupid liberal media.


Look, just be honest. You want to ban many, if not all, weapons from civilian hands. At least then we can have an honest discussion about the issue.
 
2013-01-16 10:42:15 AM  

Fail in Human Form: You want to ban many, if not all, weapons from civilian hands.


This is what paranoids actually believe, and I should know.

/former NRA member
 
2013-01-16 10:43:30 AM  

Somacandra: Fail in Human Form: You want to ban many, if not all, weapons from civilian hands.

This is what paranoids actually believe, and I should know.

/former NRA member


Fudd like typing detected.
 
2013-01-16 10:43:58 AM  

someonelse: The NRA makes its millions from memberships and donations. Their whole business model is to appeal to the "low information" demographic, and stoke their fears. They're not worried about losing the memberships of moderate, non-insane gun owners, because where else are those people gonna go? But they can draw in new money by trying to get more and more idiots scared enough of jack-booted government gun-takers that they'll open their wallets.


But the NRA also strives to curb legislation on gun control. It's much harder to do that if you look increasingly nutjobbier every time you let Wayne out of his cage and put him in front of non-believers. In order to effectively control a politician you have to do it not only with donation money, but also with the threat that you'll publicly expose their unpatriotic beliefs with a poor "report card".

The rank and file lifelong members of the NRA will always be members and they will believe as they're told. The real fight in this modern era is for thos mid-high info gun owners and the public perception that will allow the NRA to function as the guardian of the 2nd Amendment that it claims to be.
 
2013-01-16 10:44:14 AM  

Somacandra: BraveNewCheneyWorld: we only have 12,000 gun deaths, most of which are gang related and many with illegally obtained guns, MOST people are very responsible with their guns. In fact, those who aren't are a minuscule minority relatively speaking.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

Gee,where have I heard this misleading bullshiat before?


You're right, that article is misleading bullshiat.
 
2013-01-16 10:45:31 AM  

dittybopper: DrPainMD: I can't think of a president who hasn't met the requirements for impeachment.

James Garfield.

Hard to fark things up too badly when you're only in office for 6 months.


I hear he was a little stingy in his appointment for ambassador to France.

/obscure?
 
2013-01-16 10:46:38 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Somacandra: BraveNewCheneyWorld: we only have 12,000 gun deaths, most of which are gang related and many with illegally obtained guns, MOST people are very responsible with their guns. In fact, those who aren't are a minuscule minority relatively speaking.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

Gee,where have I heard this misleading bullshiat before?

You're right, that article is misleading bullshiat.


Okay where's your citation?
 
2013-01-16 10:49:42 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You're right, that article is misleading bullshiat.


The important thing is that you deny Frum's argument that we are caught in an inescapable web of mutuality and that American problems of gun violence cannot simply be labeled as 'somebody else's problem.' As long as you can do that, you'll rest easy with an untroubled conscience. And isn't that the real point of all this?
 
2013-01-16 10:55:30 AM  
"Bringing frivolous charges of impeachment" really ought to be sufficient grounds to impeach a legislator.
 
2013-01-16 10:57:41 AM  

Koalaesq: InmanRoshi: Koalaesq: In today's linked article, we learn that a bitter and delusional man is attempting a petty revenge against the president that the president will never even hear about, let alone be affected by.

Wow. This is some New York Times-level sh*t right there.

Partially true, but Alex Jones is more of a huckster snake-oil charlatan taking money from bitter and delusional men.

I dunno, you might be right, but I think these guys end up believing their own lies after a while. They feed into their own psychosis, as it were



He used to be a "true believer". He started out with just a public access show in Austin doing this out of personal passion. He successfully spearheaded a fundraising campaign to rebuild the Branch Davidian as a memorial. He was a RON PAUL supporter in the 90's before all the cool were doing it.

Then he found out you can make a lot of money doing this stuff and now it's about as cynical as it gets. Today he's mostly concerned about self promotion and building his conspiracy mogul empire. When I heard he was going to be on CNN/Piers Morgan, I knew right away he was going to create a spectacle to get people talking about him.
 
2013-01-16 10:57:54 AM  

coeyagi: Whiskey Pete: I_Am_Weasel: Mike_LowELL: Submitter seems to have skipped Article VI, Section XII, which says "those who provide taxation without representation" are not allowed to be president, and "the Founding Fathers are rolling in their grave at the sight of this Taxbongo".

I thought you were crazy, then I went to a constitution website, used CTRL-F and entered "Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at the sight of this Taxbongo" and... there it was.

You learn something new every day.

Yes. The founding fathers dreamed of a semi-literate society of morbidly obese gun hicks.

Just to put that in graphical representation:

These Guys:

[pakistanisforpeace.files.wordpress.com image 850x850]

Are Very Proud of These Guys:

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 504x604]

And who wouldn't be?

"P
A
T

R


I

O


T


I

C

DESCENDING!"


Those are the founding grandfathers, the true founding fathers are Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman. We all know how they felt about Southerners and states rights.
 
2013-01-16 10:59:40 AM  

NateGrey: JAMES YEAGER (1/9/2013): fark that. I'm telling you that if that happens, it's going to spark a Civil War, and I'll be glad to fire the first shot. ... I'm not farking putting up with this, I'm not letting my country be ruled by a dictator, I'm not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I'm going to start killing people!

Link

Gun owners are so sane and rational.


No one is saying they're going to start shooting people though.
 
2013-01-16 11:01:20 AM  
Uranus is Huge! claims Alex Jones has met the rules of involuntary commitment to a mental institution according to statutes in all fifty states
 
2013-01-16 11:02:39 AM  

thurstonxhowell: Speaking of both Presidents who have had Articles of Impeachment passed against them: Interestingly, both presidents were Democrats and, in both cases, impeachment proceedings were initiated by a Republican-controlled House in a highly-polarized political environment.

Interesting, but not surprising.


There's only been one justifiable presidential impeachment movement, and that was against Nixon. And even most sane Republicans agreed with it -- eventually.
 
2013-01-16 11:03:26 AM  
As I understand it, its Vice-President Fartbiden who was appointed in charge of these gun committee/recommendations. He is supposed to give them to President Balrog Hussein ChairMAO Fartbongo al-Chicago. If these recommendations include 'violations' of the Constitution, then shouldn't Biden be impeached and convicted  first since he originated the violations? You'd have to do that anyway because otherwise Biden would just become President if Fartbongo was impeached and convicted. Biden would have to be removed first, then any nomination to the V.P. slot (a la Gerald Ford) would be blocked by the House of  Representatives. Then you get that pesky 'Sheriff Near' out of office with another trial and.....voila! We finally have  President Boner and can get some real derp done passed into law. This is the problem for the House Republicans. They don't think these things through first. If you take the Fartbongo down first, the Fartbiden merely rises to takes its place in the Homocrat Hydra.
 
2013-01-16 11:05:11 AM  

justtray: No one is saying they're going to start shooting people though.


Uh, several people have threatened they'll start shooting people. Including one who threatened to do so if things went any farther.
 
2013-01-16 11:05:28 AM  
By the way, before you bunch of lavatory bowls get any ideas, Homocrat Hydra is the name of my next band. Not yours.
 
2013-01-16 11:06:26 AM  

Somacandra: As I understand it, its Vice-President Fartbiden who was appointed in charge of these gun committee/recommendations. He is supposed to give them to President Balrog Hussein ChairMAO Fartbongo al-Chicago. If these recommendations include 'violations' of the Constitution, then shouldn't Biden be impeached and convicted  first since he originated the violations? You'd have to do that anyway because otherwise Biden would just become President if Fartbongo was impeached and convicted. Biden would have to be removed first, then any nomination to the V.P. slot (a la Gerald Ford) would be blocked by the House of  Representatives. Then you get that pesky 'Sheriff Near' out of office with another trial and.....voila! We finally have  President Boner and can get some real derp done passed into law. This is the problem for the House Republicans. They don't think these things through first. If you take the Fartbongo down first, the Fartbiden merely rises to takes its place in the Homocrat Hydra.


That, sir, was a thing of beauty.
 
2013-01-16 11:07:42 AM  

Pants full of macaroni!!: Somacandra: As I understand it, its Vice-President Fartbiden who was appointed in charge of these gun committee/recommendations. He is supposed to give them to President Balrog Hussein ChairMAO Fartbongo al-Chicago. If these recommendations include 'violations' of the Constitution, then shouldn't Biden be impeached and convicted  first since he originated the violations? You'd have to do that anyway because otherwise Biden would just become President if Fartbongo was impeached and convicted. Biden would have to be removed first, then any nomination to the V.P. slot (a la Gerald Ford) would be blocked by the House of  Representatives. Then you get that pesky 'Sheriff Near' out of office with another trial and.....voila! We finally have  President Boner and can get some real derp done passed into law. This is the problem for the House Republicans. They don't think these things through first. If you take the Fartbongo down first, the Fartbiden merely rises to takes its place in the Homocrat Hydra.

That, sir, was a thing of beauty.


You have low standards.
 
2013-01-16 11:08:15 AM  

Somacandra: By the way, before you bunch of lavatory bowls get any ideas, Homocrat Hydra is the name of my next band. Not yours.


Fine, I'm taking Lavatory Bowls.
 
2013-01-16 11:16:21 AM  

Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.


Since aggressive conspiracy theorism represents a person heavily prone to critical flaws in reasoning
capability (Confirmation Bias), it's a perfectly legitimate reason to dismiss someone's opinions out of hand.

The broken clock being right twice a day is not a good argument for using one to tell time.
 
2013-01-16 11:17:01 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Somacandra: Fail in Human Form: You want to ban many, if not all, weapons from civilian hands.

This is what paranoids actually believe, and I should know.

/former NRA member

Fudd like typing detected.


If you're not an NRA acolyte then you're a fudd. Purge the heretic!
 
2013-01-16 11:20:31 AM  

toomuchwhargarbl: Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.

Since aggressive conspiracy theorism represents a person heavily prone to critical flaws in reasoning
capability (Confirmation Bias), it's a perfectly legitimate reason to dismiss someone's opinions out of hand.

The broken clock being right twice a day is not a good argument for using one to tell time.


This is the same asshole who claims that Newtown was a false flag operation to confiscate firearms. Anyone who takes Alex Jones seriously is just as nutty as he is.
 
2013-01-16 11:25:07 AM  

Fart_Machine: toomuchwhargarbl: Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.

Since aggressive conspiracy theorism represents a person heavily prone to critical flaws in reasoning
capability (Confirmation Bias), it's a perfectly legitimate reason to dismiss someone's opinions out of hand.

The broken clock being right twice a day is not a good argument for using one to tell time.

This is the same asshole who claims that Newtown was a false flag operation to confiscate firearms. Anyone who takes Alex Jones seriously is just as nutty as he is.


He justifies his belief by quoting something called "Operation Gladio" where we supposedly did the same thing in Europe.
 
2013-01-16 11:29:36 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Mercutio74: Fail in Human Form: Not trolling, I believe exactly what I say.

Except that the scolding preposterous response from the NRA made the media's gibberish look like the work of a Rhodes Scholar. I think even a cursory look at the issue, especially as it relates to the recent school shooting(s), suggests that there aren't a lot of mainstream media voices from either side of the issue making a ton of sense.

It's been a pure withdrawal into tired rhetoric from both sides, and neither one has a chance of being the "solution" to a problem that probably has more cultural causes than legislative ones.

That's because the NRA has refused to let people use this tragedy to force them into "giving in". If I feel I've given up far to much already, and you cry for more, what's left to fill time on the 24/7 news channels other than rhetoric?


What exactly have you given up? your right to a fully automatic? i feel so bad for you. I really do.
 
2013-01-16 11:30:21 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Fart_Machine: toomuchwhargarbl: Fail in Human Form: someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?

He gets demonized because of his conspiracy theories, it allows people who don't want to listen to just dismiss him out of hand.

Since aggressive conspiracy theorism represents a person heavily prone to critical flaws in reasoning
capability (Confirmation Bias), it's a perfectly legitimate reason to dismiss someone's opinions out of hand.

The broken clock being right twice a day is not a good argument for using one to tell time.

This is the same asshole who claims that Newtown was a false flag operation to confiscate firearms. Anyone who takes Alex Jones seriously is just as nutty as he is.

He justifies his belief by quoting something called "Operation Gladio" where we supposedly did the same thing in Europe.


So his justification is another conspiracy theory. Brilliant!
 
2013-01-16 11:30:57 AM  

greenboy: Fail in Human Form: Mercutio74: Fail in Human Form: Not trolling, I believe exactly what I say.

Except that the scolding preposterous response from the NRA made the media's gibberish look like the work of a Rhodes Scholar. I think even a cursory look at the issue, especially as it relates to the recent school shooting(s), suggests that there aren't a lot of mainstream media voices from either side of the issue making a ton of sense.

It's been a pure withdrawal into tired rhetoric from both sides, and neither one has a chance of being the "solution" to a problem that probably has more cultural causes than legislative ones.

That's because the NRA has refused to let people use this tragedy to force them into "giving in". If I feel I've given up far to much already, and you cry for more, what's left to fill time on the 24/7 news channels other than rhetoric?

What exactly have you given up? your right to a fully automatic? i feel so bad for you. I really do.


The crazy part is, fully automatic weapons are already heavily regulated. And I don't hear anyone calling for the repeal of the National Firearms Act.
 
2013-01-16 11:32:08 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: And I don't hear anyone calling for the repeal of the National Firearms Act.


*Waves*

Hi how ya doin?
 
2013-01-16 11:33:49 AM  
If someone tells you they listen to Alex Jones, it's a good indication that they're an idiot who isn't worth your time.
 
2013-01-16 11:37:34 AM  

Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: And I don't hear anyone calling for the repeal of the National Firearms Act.

*Waves*

Hi how ya doin?


Do you even know what the National Firearms act actually is and what precipitated its passage?
 
2013-01-16 11:39:51 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: And I don't hear anyone calling for the repeal of the National Firearms Act.

*Waves*

Hi how ya doin?

Do you even know what the National Firearms act actually is and what precipitated its passage?


Yes and yes (I should be able to pass a NCIS check and walk out with a select fire/SBR/SBS/Silencer/ect) TYVM

/The drug runners are today are running pot, end the drug war. Didn't work during prohibition, won't work now.
 
2013-01-16 11:39:53 AM  

cameroncrazy1984:
The crazy part is, fully automatic weapons are already heavily regulated. And I don't hear anyone calling for the repeal of the National Firearms Act.


So are imported "non sporting" firearms, due to Executive Order restricting their import by George H. W. Bush. No one is squealing for their repeal. And I don't hear anyone calling for the repeal on the import restrictions on Chinese Firearms either. If I was some sort of conspiracy theorist I'd say that the "Free Market, gun totin, murkin" lobby was engaging in economic protectionism of industries that donate to and vote for Republicans, and that a bunch of dead schoolchildren is just the cost of doing business.

/waves tiny American flag.
 
2013-01-16 11:41:03 AM  
While I know it's unfair to lump all gun owners into the Alex Jones camp, but I am originally from Kentucky, and a good deal of my gun owning acquaintances talk exactly farking like him.

I understand sane, responsible gun owners don't want this nut bar to be their representative, but you have to understand a lot of right wing gun rights enthusiasts have a hard-on for this paranoid dickhead.
 
2013-01-16 11:42:51 AM  

Fart_Machine: This is the same asshole who claims that Newtown was a false flag operation to confiscate firearms. Anyone who takes Alex Jones seriously is just as nutty as he is.


That's an alarmingly high number of Republicans, and the majority of Paultards. Alex Jones carries a lot of weight in hard-right conservative circles.
 
2013-01-16 11:43:57 AM  

Zerochance: Alex Jones carries a lot of weight


He's the right wing Michael Moore!
 
2013-01-16 11:44:17 AM  

Zerochance: Fart_Machine: This is the same asshole who claims that Newtown was a false flag operation to confiscate firearms. Anyone who takes Alex Jones seriously is just as nutty as he is.

That's an alarmingly high number of Republicans, and the majority of Paultards. Alex Jones carries a lot of weight in hard-right conservative circles.


Right wing media loves their judas goats more than a fat kid loves candy.
 
2013-01-16 11:45:37 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Yes and yes (I should be able to pass a NCIS check and walk out with a select fire/SBR/SBS/Silencer/ect) TYVM


So you have zero idea why the National Firearms Act was passed and why full-auto or select-fire weapons are a REALLY BAD IDEA in the hands of civilians?
 
2013-01-16 11:46:06 AM  
10 Minutes till gun owners find out how bad we're going to get screwed

Link

t0.gstatic.com
 
2013-01-16 11:46:48 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: Yes and yes (I should be able to pass a NCIS check and walk out with a select fire/SBR/SBS/Silencer/ect) TYVM

So you have zero idea why the National Firearms Act was passed and why full-auto or select-fire weapons are a REALLY BAD IDEA in the hands of civilians?


I pointed out why, and I disagree with your assertion.
 
2013-01-16 11:47:56 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: So you have zero idea why the National Firearms Act was passed and why full-auto or select-fire weapons are a REALLY BAD IDEA in the hands of civilians?


In fact, the more I think about it, select fire would likely be even more deadly in the hands of the public that full auto. You could probably do some really bad stuff in a crowd with 3 round bursts.
 
2013-01-16 11:48:28 AM  

Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: Yes and yes (I should be able to pass a NCIS check and walk out with a select fire/SBR/SBS/Silencer/ect) TYVM

So you have zero idea why the National Firearms Act was passed and why full-auto or select-fire weapons are a REALLY BAD IDEA in the hands of civilians?

I pointed out why, and I disagree with your assertion.


You disagree that gangster violence in the 30s actually happened prior to the the 1934 NFA?

I'm sorry that history isn't your strong suit.
 
2013-01-16 11:49:20 AM  

Mercutio74: cameroncrazy1984: So you have zero idea why the National Firearms Act was passed and why full-auto or select-fire weapons are a REALLY BAD IDEA in the hands of civilians?

In fact, the more I think about it, select fire would likely be even more deadly in the hands of the public that full auto. You could probably do some really bad stuff in a crowd with 3 round bursts.


Yeah, ironically enough you could hit a lot more people with burst-fire than with rock-and-roll. Hard to control muzzle climb that way.
 
2013-01-16 11:49:48 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: Yes and yes (I should be able to pass a NCIS check and walk out with a select fire/SBR/SBS/Silencer/ect) TYVM

So you have zero idea why the National Firearms Act was passed and why full-auto or select-fire weapons are a REALLY BAD IDEA in the hands of civilians?

I pointed out why, and I disagree with your assertion.

You disagree that gangster violence in the 30s actually happened prior to the the 1934 NFA?


I agree that it happened, disagree that it justified a ban. Removing prohibition of alcohol would have been the proper solution.
 
2013-01-16 11:50:33 AM  

Diogenes: Fail in Human Form: Understandable, but when is it ok to "get mad"?

That's a much broader question.  All I can say is if I'm mad, and I want people to know it and take me seriously, I will try to use a voice or look to another voice that can be taken seriously.  In all things, if you want to get traction on an issue, you have to be heard by the people who don't share your opinion.

More specific to the topic at hand, that's why I just don't understand the NRA's strategy here.


The NRA's strategy is to sell more guns. Increasing the level of fear and paranoia works wonders in that regard.
 
2013-01-16 11:50:35 AM  

Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: And I don't hear anyone calling for the repeal of the National Firearms Act.

*Waves*

Hi how ya doin?

Do you even know what the National Firearms act actually is and what precipitated its passage?

Yes and yes (I should be able to pass a NCIS check and walk out with a select fire/SBR/SBS/Silencer/ect) TYVM

/The drug runners are today are running pot, end the drug war. Didn't work during prohibition, won't work now.


I can see it now. A fully auto M4 with grenade launcher and acog 4 scope for everyone. I feel like anti-gun control people are so fearful that there is a slippery slope to them eventually only being able to arm themselves with an official red ryder bb gun with a compass in in the stock and a thing that tells time.
You all have lost all common sense. You don't need a 30 round banana clip. You do need to lock your weapons at all times. You do not need high incendiary thermonuclear exploding bullets. You do not need a silencer or a flash suppressor.
 
2013-01-16 11:51:36 AM  

Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: cameroncrazy1984: Fail in Human Form: Yes and yes (I should be able to pass a NCIS check and walk out with a select fire/SBR/SBS/Silencer/ect) TYVM

So you have zero idea why the National Firearms Act was passed and why full-auto or select-fire weapons are a REALLY BAD IDEA in the hands of civilians?

I pointed out why, and I disagree with your assertion.

You disagree that gangster violence in the 30s actually happened prior to the the 1934 NFA?

I agree that it happened, disagree that it justified a ban. Removing prohibition of alcohol would have been the proper solution.


Question: how many full-auto spree shootings have there been since the ban?
 
2013-01-16 11:58:06 AM  
When I think Alex Jones I think, "Constitutional Scholar"
 
2013-01-16 12:07:03 PM  
Obama has met the criteria for impeachment by failing to meet the Article II, Section 3 requirement to take Care that the following Laws be faithfully executed:

-The War Crimes Act
-Laws prohibiting the destruction of evidence by CIA personnel of War Crimes Act violations l
-The War Powers Act
-The Fourth Amendment prohibitions against unreasonable and/or unwarranted searches and seizures.

Prepare the Articles on those grounds, Republican douches, and I'll be right behind you. Otherwise, take 20 minutes to study the how the response to the Shays Rebellion differed from that to the Whiskey Rebellion to learn what the 2nd Amendment actually meant in the context of the times in which it was written. Hint: your imagined right to a semi-automatic weapon and 30 bullet magazines has nothing to do with it.
 
2013-01-16 12:14:42 PM  

Karma Curmudgeon: -The War Crimes Act
-Laws prohibiting the destruction of evidence by CIA personnel of War Crimes Act violations l
-The War Powers Act
-The Fourth Amendment prohibitions against unreasonable and/or unwarranted searches and seizures.


So you're basically just making things up?
 
2013-01-16 12:18:38 PM  
Wow, 23 executive orders signed...
 
2013-01-16 12:20:00 PM  

Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Wow, 23 executive orders signed...


The following is a list, provided by the White House, of executive actions President Obama plans to take to address gun violence.
1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
11. Nominate an ATF director.
12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

He basically threw it back onto congress. I'm not thrilled, but this isn't nearly as bad as it could have been.
 
2013-01-16 12:23:28 PM  
Fail in Human Form:

Thanks for the list, that is very helpful. Seems like a very thoughtful set of ideas.
 
2013-01-16 12:24:58 PM  

LasersHurt: Fail in Human Form:

Thanks for the list, that is very helpful. Seems like a very thoughtful set of ideas.


Don't worry, I'm sure the NRA will tell us that it's the WORST. POSSIBLE. THING.
 
2013-01-16 12:26:03 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"

Gun control drum-beater - "Find a crazy person on their side, then try to associate him with everyone who disagrees with us, we need to poison that well. Oh, and don't ever try to argue against 2nd amendment supporters' facts, it'll just provide any undecided people the opportunity to realize that we're just pandering to emotions, and our gun control plan won't do what we say it will. Just call them names, or pretend they said something else."


Since you already got a number of hits, I won't look like a total n00b by responding to your troll. I guess I need that for my self confidence*.

But.. some gun-control drum-beaters mention:
1 - gun ownership is strongly correlated to number of homicides, both across states and across first world countries
2 - the leading cause of violent child death is due to guns in the house
3 - guns are 4-10 times more likely to be used in the commission of a crime than in the prevention of one
4 - gun-rights advocates seem to only be able to pull out "examples" rather than provide statistics. I have yet to see a single statistic that does not clearly show that every gun sold in the US causes more harm than it solves. Gun-control works across the world to reduce gun ownership rates and homicides, as well as a variety of crimes.
5 - and if examples are the only language a gun-rights advocate understands, then maybe they should look at crime statistics for Kennesaw, GA (a strange example where forcing guns on people is seen as advocating gun rights) versus Newtown, CT (which has CT's stricter gun control laws). Surprisingly, rates are far lower for nearly all crimes in Newtown. Homicides have had a recent spike, but I doubt gun-rights advocates want to explore the causes of that too closely.

* or a gun

/sad that gun-rights advocates seem to have swallowed whole a number of made-up statistics over the year instead of actual scholarly research
//which shows clearly guns do more harm than good, along many scientific metrics
 
2013-01-16 12:28:50 PM  

Felgraf: LasersHurt: Fail in Human Form:

Thanks for the list, that is very helpful. Seems like a very thoughtful set of ideas.

Don't worry, I'm sure the NRA will tell us that it's the WORST. POSSIBLE. THING.


Oh of course.
 
2013-01-16 12:30:46 PM  

Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.


I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.
 
2013-01-16 12:32:01 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: So you're basically just making things up?


Did I sleep through the torture trials? The Rodriguez prosecution? The cessation of warrantless wiretapping and whatever the hell it actually is that the NSA is sweeping, and what they're doing with it? The report to Congress of hostilities taken against Libya?

No, I'm not making things up. I just don't apply a partisan standard to the need for accountability and the value of the rule of law.
 
2013-01-16 12:34:18 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.


Providing incentives for schools to hire "resource officers" is not the same as requiring all schools to have armed security on campus.
 
2013-01-16 12:42:08 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.

Providing incentives for schools to hire "resource officers" is not the same as requiring all schools to have armed security on campus.


No, but it's damn close. And considering the whole concept of having armed guards in schools was thoroughly trashed when the NRA proposed it (personally I think it was stupid then and now), and anyone who supported it was labeled insane, you guys have an uncomfortable 180 to do.
 
2013-01-16 12:43:04 PM  
Totally pointless to try to impeach Obama when the Senate would not go along with the farce. Also the time would be better spent getting something positive done.
 
2013-01-16 12:43:39 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: No, but it's damn close


No it isn't. It's not even close at all. There's not even a requirement that resource officers be armed.
 
2013-01-16 12:48:00 PM  
I wonder if they'll have to open up NCIS to C&R FFLs if we sell a weapon that we bought on our license?
 
2013-01-16 12:48:01 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.

Providing incentives for schools to hire "resource officers" is not the same as requiring all schools to have armed security on campus.

No, but it's damn close. And considering the whole concept of having armed guards in schools was thoroughly trashed when the NRA proposed it (personally I think it was stupid then and now), and anyone who supported it was labeled insane, you guys have an uncomfortable 180 to do.


Only your strawman has a 180 to do.
 
2013-01-16 12:48:01 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: No, but it's damn close

No it isn't. It's not even close at all. There's not even a requirement that resource officers be armed.


your wrong fartlib, it says officer right in the name. See "resource officer". He'll have, like, 10 different guns on him at any time. Get you're facts straight.
 
2013-01-16 12:48:43 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: No, but it's damn close

No it isn't. It's not even close at all. There's not even a requirement that resource officers be armed.


Then what good would they be in preventing anyone armed with a butter knife from harming anyone? Or more accurately, even if Obama got his wish list. "Omg, there's an unarmed guard, I better take my 6 shot revolver and run!"

You may commence your regularly scheduled backpedaling.
 
2013-01-16 12:48:57 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.


Nah, I still think it's not the best idea. After all, we've been told repeatedly that, why if these assault weapons were banned, the crazies would just make BOMBS, because highly lethal and highly destructive bombs are Super Easy to make without any issue.

As such, unless the armed guards contain a bomb sniffing dog for every school 24/7, the crazies who want to murder a lot of people can just craft a bomb and place it outside of school hours, and the armed guards won't be able to stop them!
 
2013-01-16 12:51:54 PM  
Now that we know his recommendations, it will be great to see Congress try to impeach Obama for asking Congress to write a bill reinstating the federal assault weapons ban and close the gun show loophole. Look, I honestly don't think these sort of measures will have a significant effect on gunowners' rights or gun violence, but the number of people acting like this is important (either that it must get passed or must be stopped) just reminds me how much of politics is just a sport and the "symbolism" of which side won the debate is seen as more important than the actual policy measures.
 
2013-01-16 12:52:25 PM  

Felgraf: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.

Nah, I still think it's not the best idea. After all, we've been told repeatedly that, why if these assault weapons were banned, the crazies would just make BOMBS, because highly lethal and highly destructive bombs are Super Easy to make without any issue.

As such, unless the armed guards contain a bomb sniffing dog for every school 24/7, the crazies who want to murder a lot of people can just craft a bomb and place it outside of school hours, and the armed guards won't be able to stop them!


Or just not go to a school, and instead, say, a mall.

Its a bad idea regardless, but the original argument is a strawman anyway. No one says security is entirely ineffective. Its just not cost effective.

Not to mention it historically has not worked.
 
2013-01-16 12:54:53 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: No, but it's damn close

No it isn't. It's not even close at all. There's not even a requirement that resource officers be armed.

Then what good would they be in preventing anyone armed with a butter knife from harming anyone? Or more accurately, even if Obama got his wish list. "Omg, there's an unarmed guard, I better take my 6 shot revolver and run!"

You may commence your regularly scheduled backpedaling.


Because the only way to prevent school shootings is to be armed?

Are you kidding me?
 
2013-01-16 12:56:24 PM  
what a resource officer may look like:

www.imfdb.org
 
2013-01-16 12:57:37 PM  
Anything coming from Alex Jones can be summarily dismissed.

Allow me to explain:

Alex Jones says, "_______".

It's bullshiat.

Alex Jones says, "_______".

It's bullshiat.

Alex Jones says, "_______".

It's bullshiat.

And that's exactly how it works.
 
2013-01-16 12:58:26 PM  

Bigdogdaddy: I thought the impeachment against Clinton was bs. however I would not have wanted a Rmoney presidency but if he banned any firearms by executive order, I would not be sad to see him impeached and convicted.


Surprise! He didn't.

Not that that was even a possibility, since his, and/or Joe Biden's, understanding of what an executive order is for wasn't garnered from the back of a cereal box, or from Fox Mews(tm).
 
2013-01-16 12:59:32 PM  
enough with this bullshiat, the weeper will NEVER bring up impeachment proceedings.
 
2013-01-16 01:01:12 PM  

thurstonxhowell: Speaking of both Presidents who have had Articles of Impeachment passed against them: Interestingly, both presidents were Democrats and, in both cases, impeachment proceedings were initiated by a Republican-controlled House in a highly-polarized political environment.

Interesting, but not surprising.


Best part of that? Hillary Rodham Clinton served on the committee that recommended the impeachment, or whatever it was called.
 
2013-01-16 01:01:14 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Because the only way to prevent school shootings is to be armed?

Are you kidding me?


Explain exactly what hiring 1 more unarmed person per school is supposed to do to prevent what just happened in Sandy Hook. Be specific.
 
2013-01-16 01:05:45 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Gun control drones - "Hey, we can't seem to form a rational argument against gun ownership. There are simply no facts or statistics backing our position. What should we do?"


I wonder why that is? Could it be that any and all funding for research into the issues has been blocked by congress? Luckily, it was one of the executive orders just signed by the President to allow the CDC to look at it. Maybe now we can get some facts. Maybe they'll show no need for gun control, maybe they'll show gun deaths only happen on purple Tuesdays to people wearing chartreuse, but at least BOTH sides will have some actual data instead of knee-jerk emotionalism.
 
2013-01-16 01:07:19 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Explain exactly what hiring 1 more unarmed person per school is supposed to do to prevent what just happened in Sandy Hook. Be specific.


Explain how hiring 1 ARMED person per school would have certainly prevented what happened at Sandy Hook?

If someone's not expecting you to open fire on them, they are likely going to be dead before you get a chance to retaliate, draw your weapon, or even know what's going on. (Like, say, an officer shot in the head during a traffic stop on a school university).

A single armed guard can only be in one place at once. They cannot teleport.
 
2013-01-16 01:09:45 PM  

someonelse: I'm not normally a big fan of using the blatantly crazy guy to represent a whole position on an issue. But, serious question: What is the difference between Jones' position on gun control and the NRA's position?


20dB
 
2013-01-16 01:12:33 PM  

Felgraf: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Explain exactly what hiring 1 more unarmed person per school is supposed to do to prevent what just happened in Sandy Hook. Be specific.

Explain how hiring 1 ARMED person per school would have certainly prevented what happened at Sandy Hook?

If someone's not expecting you to open fire on them, they are likely going to be dead before you get a chance to retaliate, draw your weapon, or even know what's going on. (Like, say, an officer shot in the head during a traffic stop on a school university).

A single armed guard can only be in one place at once. They cannot teleport.


Well then, it's a good thing I said that was a stupid idea right from the start!
 
2013-01-16 01:19:17 PM  

Somacandra: As I understand it, its Vice-President Fartbiden who was appointed in charge of these gun committee/recommendations. He is supposed to give them to President Balrog Hussein ChairMAO Fartbongo al-Chicago. If these recommendations include 'violations' of the Constitution, then shouldn't Biden be impeached and convicted  first since he originated the violations? You'd have to do that anyway because otherwise Biden would just become President if Fartbongo was impeached and convicted. Biden would have to be removed first, then any nomination to the V.P. slot (a la Gerald Ford) would be blocked by the House of  Representatives. Then you get that pesky 'Sheriff Near' out of office with another trial and.....voila! We finally have  President Boner and can get some real derp done passed into law. This is the problem for the House Republicans. They don't think these things through first. If you take the Fartbongo down first, the Fartbiden merely rises to takes its place in the Homocrat Hydra.


Since I can't decide if you are just really bad at satire or a hetereophile, I'm gonna split the difference and give you 4/10.
 
2013-01-16 01:31:00 PM  
can we stop making this guy richer?
 
2013-01-16 01:31:23 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.

Providing incentives for schools to hire "resource officers" is not the same as requiring all schools to have armed security on campus.

No, but it's damn close. And considering the whole concept of having armed guards in schools was thoroughly trashed when the NRA proposed it (personally I think it was stupid then and now), and anyone who supported it was labeled insane, you guys have an uncomfortable 180 to do.


How so? Many schools have resource officers - not all are armed btw. Columbine had an armed resource officer, if I recall correctly. Allowing and supporting a school to hire one if they want one, is NOT the same as saying every school must have one. Though I'm still against it - I'm tired of the erosion of childhood, and going to school in an armed fortress is not something I'd have wanted for my kid when she was younger.
 
2013-01-16 01:38:36 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.

Providing incentives for schools to hire "resource officers" is not the same as requiring all schools to have armed security on campus.

No, but it's damn close. And considering the whole concept of having armed guards in schools was thoroughly trashed when the NRA proposed it (personally I think it was stupid then and now), and anyone who supported it was labeled insane, you guys have an uncomfortable 180 to do.


Translation:

"Area Man Passionate Critic of what he Imagines President Obama's Executive Order to be"
 
2013-01-16 01:55:20 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: cameroncrazy1984: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fail in Human Form: 18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

I expect the unquestioning dem loyalists that have been arguing against this to have a sudden change of heart.

Providing incentives for schools to hire "resource officers" is not the same as requiring all schools to have armed security on campus.

No, but it's damn close. And considering the whole concept of having armed guards in schools was thoroughly trashed when the NRA proposed it (personally I think it was stupid then and now), and anyone who supported it was labeled insane, you guys have an uncomfortable 180 to do.


The NRA were suggesting the placement of US soldiers and policemen in schools. Don't move the goalpost.
 
2013-01-16 01:55:50 PM  
Alex Jones vehemently claims that I am a medium-sized, four-legged tapestry cosmetics bag with brass frames and clasp, that follows him meekly everywhere he goes.

Obviously, cosmetics bags cannot use computer keyboards, so what does that tell you?
 
2013-01-16 02:01:49 PM  

coeyagi: thurstonxhowell: Speaking of both Presidents who have had Articles of Impeachment passed against them: Interestingly, both presidents were Democrats and, in both cases, impeachment proceedings were initiated by a Republican-controlled House in a highly-polarized political environment.

Interesting, but not surprising.

You realize that the ideologies of the parties have basically switched since then, right? I mean, don't get me wrong, I would love to besmirch the name of the GOP every minute of every day and from every corner of this country, but your statement - it doesn't mean what you think it means.


No, but it does mean the modern GOP has attempted to/seriously considered impeaching every Dem President since 1980 (probably would've gone after Carter too if he had won a 2nd term).
 
2013-01-16 02:04:41 PM  
Alex Jones, the Master of Conspiracy Theories - who pushes the most ridiculous crap imaginable while ignoring the reasonable questions staring him in the face. I wonder who pays him.
 
2013-01-16 02:10:40 PM  
Hey, that's a good question. Who is this freak's paymaster?
 
2013-01-16 02:18:42 PM  

quiotu: The NRA were suggesting the placement of US soldiers and policemen in schools. Don't move the goalpost.


If their duty is to protect the kids from mass shootings, does it really matter who signs their paycheck? Yes, a school resource officer isn't EXACTLY the same thing, but it's close enough. Honestly, your level of hair splitting is laughable.
 
2013-01-16 02:25:48 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: quiotu: The NRA were suggesting the placement of US soldiers and policemen in schools. Don't move the goalpost.

If their duty is to protect the kids from mass shootings, does it really matter who signs their paycheck? Yes, a school resource officer isn't EXACTLY the same thing, but it's close enough. Honestly, your level of hair splitting is laughable.


Helping out schools who want resource officers (along with counselors and other support staff) but may lack the resources to do so (with additionally no requirement that these people be armed) is not even remotely "close" to the NRA's suggestion.
 
2013-01-16 02:29:43 PM  

bmongar: BronyMedic: Alex Jones Claims....

Stopped reading right there. Anything with that name and the word "claims" should tell you it's grade A Bullshiat, Mostly Circus Animal no Filler.

If Alex Jones said the sun was going to rise in the east I would make sure my western shades were closed so the sun wouldn't wake me up in the morning.


I'd just post a comment laughing about the new 'can't read a compass; ALEX JONES JOURNALISM' meme.
 
2013-01-16 02:36:50 PM  

Biological Ali: BraveNewCheneyWorld: quiotu: The NRA were suggesting the placement of US soldiers and policemen in schools. Don't move the goalpost.

If their duty is to protect the kids from mass shootings, does it really matter who signs their paycheck? Yes, a school resource officer isn't EXACTLY the same thing, but it's close enough. Honestly, your level of hair splitting is laughable.

Helping out schools who want resource officers (along with counselors and other support staff) but may lack the resources to do so (with additionally no requirement that these people be armed) is not even remotely "close" to the NRA's suggestion.


So... you don't know what a school resource officer is.. Ok then.
 
2013-01-16 02:48:40 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Biological Ali: BraveNewCheneyWorld: quiotu: The NRA were suggesting the placement of US soldiers and policemen in schools. Don't move the goalpost.

If their duty is to protect the kids from mass shootings, does it really matter who signs their paycheck? Yes, a school resource officer isn't EXACTLY the same thing, but it's close enough. Honestly, your level of hair splitting is laughable.

Helping out schools who want resource officers (along with counselors and other support staff) but may lack the resources to do so (with additionally no requirement that these people be armed) is not even remotely "close" to the NRA's suggestion.

So... you don't know what a school resource officer is.. Ok then.


You jumped the gun - that's quite understandable. You saw something that you thought was a perfect "Gotcha!" - maybe you were blinded by the word "officer" or something, who knows - but it turned out not to be the case.

Just let it go and move on. Ideally with some sort of mea culpa - people get respect for admitting mistakes.
 
2013-01-16 02:50:06 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Biological Ali: BraveNewCheneyWorld: quiotu: The NRA were suggesting the placement of US soldiers and policemen in schools. Don't move the goalpost.

If their duty is to protect the kids from mass shootings, does it really matter who signs their paycheck? Yes, a school resource officer isn't EXACTLY the same thing, but it's close enough. Honestly, your level of hair splitting is laughable.

Helping out schools who want resource officers (along with counselors and other support staff) but may lack the resources to do so (with additionally no requirement that these people be armed) is not even remotely "close" to the NRA's suggestion.

So... you don't know what a school resource officer is.. Ok then.


It's clear you don't.
 
2013-01-16 02:52:19 PM  

Biological Ali: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Biological Ali: BraveNewCheneyWorld: quiotu: The NRA were suggesting the placement of US soldiers and policemen in schools. Don't move the goalpost.

If their duty is to protect the kids from mass shootings, does it really matter who signs their paycheck? Yes, a school resource officer isn't EXACTLY the same thing, but it's close enough. Honestly, your level of hair splitting is laughable.

Helping out schools who want resource officers (along with counselors and other support staff) but may lack the resources to do so (with additionally no requirement that these people be armed) is not even remotely "close" to the NRA's suggestion.

So... you don't know what a school resource officer is.. Ok then.

You jumped the gun - that's quite understandable. You saw something that you thought was a perfect "Gotcha!" - maybe you were blinded by the word "officer" or something, who knows - but it turned out not to be the case.

Just let it go and move on. Ideally with some sort of mea culpa - people get respect for admitting mistakes.


Explain exactly what you think is so different between a soldier or a police officer and a resource officer in this context.
 
2013-01-16 03:03:01 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Explain exactly what you think is so different between a soldier or a police officer and a resource officer in this context.


School resource officers (the ones mentioned in this EO at least) are police officers.

Though I assume your question was more along the lines of the difference between school resource officers and active-duty soldiers or police officers patrolling a beat. In which case, it would be akin to asking "Why do you think a pastry chef is so different from a coal miner?" Sure, one could conceivably start going through all the differences, but it would be easier (and certainly much shorter) for the person asserting that the two are similar to justify their case.
 
2013-01-16 03:27:44 PM  

qorkfiend: d23: The party that are "physical conservatives" are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars by forcing a senate trial that can't possibly go anywhere because it's initiated only because they don't like him.

Stop calling the GOP conservative. It's total bullshiat.

Eh. It won't even get that far; without some actual wrongdoing (even though the investigation was politically motivated bullshiat, Clinton did commit perjury) they'll never get enough Democrats to reach the two-thirds vote requirement for articles of impeachment.


Actually, no. No he didn't.
 
2013-01-16 03:58:08 PM  

Mercutio74: Zerochance: Alex Jones carries a lot of weight

He's the right wing Michael Moore!


You jest, but believe it or not, Alex Jones and Michael Moore actually agree on something regarding guns. And so do I ߟ I've been talking about this on FARK and other online services for over a decade.

Unfortunately, Jones mentioned it as part of his ranting stream of mostly insanity in his interview with Piers Morgan, which gives the media and people in general reason to dismiss it out of hand as just another part of his insanity.

Yet, a few years ago, Michael Moore said basically the same thing!

When Alex Jones and Michael Moore actually agree on something related to gun violence, perhaps it should be looked at above and beyond their usual rants?
 
2013-01-16 04:33:11 PM  

Kittypie070: Hey, that's a good question. Who is this freak's paymaster?


Evidence indicates that he's successfully monetized crowdsourced crazy. Incidentally how I first learned about Alex Jones, and a subsequent interview with Ronson. I'm remarkably fond of Ronson, though.
 
2013-01-17 12:20:18 AM  
God literally damn ALex Jones and the Republican Party. I say we impeach Alex Jones. LIterally fark him.
 
2013-01-17 03:30:33 AM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: I'm so proud of the GOP! This time it'll work! Unlike 1996 and the election rout after!


You must not have noticed how thoroughly this thread has been derailed by gun fetishists and card carrying trolls.

it's ok, sometimes I fire off a comment before diving in.
 
Displayed 189 of 189 comments

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