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.

(AP)   President Obama has announced his new world order where Uncle Sam will now confiscate your gun...wait...what...those are, um, reasonable and Constitutional expansions to regulation authority. You may now cancel your outrage   (hosted.ap.org) divider line 1394
    More: Interesting, President Obama, Uncle Sam  
•       •       •

25800 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Jan 2013 at 2:14 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1394 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-16 04:37:59 PM

Endive Wombat: LasersHurt: Endive Wombat: Grand_Moff_Joseph: That's pretty much the point.  Yeah, it'll be a little more annoying for the 95% of folks like you who play it straight, but it standardizes the entire system, and (hopefully) makes a dent in keeping wholly unqualified people away from the guns.  The upshot, like you said, is that it's not a ban.  It's a bit more headache for a lot more safety, imo.

How does this address the millions of guns that are on the black market/in the hands of criminals who are not allowed to own a gun?

It helps to slow the supply of guns through buyers TO the black market. After all, they start somewhere.

No it doesn't.  There are an estimated 300M guns in the US.  All a determined criminal needs to do is to simply break into someones house and take them.  Which is how a lot of guns get into the black market to begin with.  So this does nothing to address current supply.


But isn't having a gun in the home supposed to prevent this type of crime from happening? Now you're saying that having guns in the home increases the risk of crime.

That's some fine reasoning, right there.
 
2013-01-16 04:38:16 PM
I'm really interested though to see if this is going to include vets being treated for PSTD, and if there is a drop in those who do if it does include them. It's going to be almost impossible to enforce on a case by case instance, and I expect it's going to be a blanket statement on people getting mental help in general.
 
2013-01-16 04:39:02 PM
You're all mentally ill

/goes back to cave
 
2013-01-16 04:39:23 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: plewis: Yes, armed guards at school are stupid. Cops, who are armed, at schools are not.

What's amusing is watching anti- NRA partisans pretend that these two proposals are entirely different, with one of them being allegedly moronic and beneath contempt, and the other one absolutely brilliant -- even though the cops would, by definition, be guarding the schools.


I noticed that too. In fact the week after the shooting when the NRA gave it's first press statement, they suggested that police could be used to protect schools that very day. The anti-NRA crowd immediately said they were proposing more guns.

I think it was safe to assume the police were to use their existing firearms, not get new ones. That's just silly and kind of dishonst.

The NRA did mention that in the future there could be non-police armed guards, but meant that as a more local issue that communities need to work out based on their specific needs.

I was completely in support of almost all the recommendations made by the White House today prior to Sandy Hook. Now I'm pretty much against anything suggested. My position was changed by seeing just how disingenuous the gun control movement is.

They're not looking for anything reasonable.
 
2013-01-16 04:39:40 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: bradknaus:  Fair point.  So, would you object to the extra steps I outlined above?  IMO, it would ensure that the rest of the folks who have ARs are handling them responsibly, as you seem to be.


NO, I don't think your steps are reasonable. Why should a subset of guns being used in the minority of crimes be required to be more strictly regulated and controlled then the others at the cost of the owners and people that use theirs for target shooting. Remember, pistols are used for something like 95% of gun crime, why an assault rifle ban again?

Like the other user I got into it for target shooting and shoot a few thousand rounds a year. Why should I be required to waste my valued time (billable around $200/hour) plus my tax cost on ammo etc because 2 or 4 times "assault rifles" were used? Why should I have to lock my gun up any better then locking it my house owned and lived in by only me? If some dick steals it from my house I don't think he's going to leave it behind because it has a "lock" on it or in a safe that would take about 5 minutes to pry open (most gun safes on the market). Note: I do lock them up in a safe etc.

I do believe anybody allowed to own any firearm should be required to attend a safety course. Goodness there are some people at public ranges that scare the crap out of me.
 
2013-01-16 04:40:00 PM
NRTFT.

Can I get an executive summary of the goofyderper reactions, por favor?
 
2013-01-16 04:40:13 PM

stoli n coke: minoridiot: How are they going to enforce the background checks in private sales?  Isn't that going to be as effective as trying to make prostitution illegal?

How about requiring a title? That way, if it turns out, you sell a gun to a criminal and that gun is used in a crime, it's on you too.

It's a crime for a felon to possess a gun, so why shouldn't there be a penalty against selling a felon one?

Doesn't even have to cost anything. Consider it the "responsible" part of responsible gun ownership.


It's already illegal to provide a firearm to someone you know is disallowed from having one.
 
2013-01-16 04:40:44 PM
Yeah, good luck with all of that, farkiing moron.

/If any thing this has taught us why the government should not be allowed to collect any information on law abiding citizens exercising their human and Constitutional rights.
//Punish law abiding citizens.
///Then I'm done being a law abiding citizen.
IXFark you you sick fark so-called-progressives.
 
2013-01-16 04:41:08 PM

gameshowhost: NRTFT.

Can I get an executive summary of the goofyderper reactions, por favor?


Guns owners are monsters, assault weapons belong on a battle field, you're all mentally ill, fark the constitution.... the usual anti gun derp
 
2013-01-16 04:41:26 PM

MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
[world.guns.ru image 597x168]

9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Also make a pistol version
[calicolightweaponsystems.com image 444x184]

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!


Anybody that thinks scaring others with guns (although those pics are more absurd than frightening) should probably not have guns.
 
2013-01-16 04:41:53 PM

Corvus: Ow! That was my feelings!: grumpyoldmann: Excuse me 2nd amendment douche bags but it doesn't say a thing about allowing possession of automatic weapons and large capacity magazines. Muzzle loaders and flintlocks satisfy the constitution.
I still say that the victims of accidental shootings should be NRA members or their family. They are ultimately responsible for the over abundance of friendly fire deaths.

Hey, prohibitionist douchebag, the first amendment doesn't say anything about protecting your free speech rights on the internet, STFU.

Oh so then having nuclear weapons is protected by the 2nd amendment?

 
2013-01-16 04:42:05 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: It appears many members of the Fark Militia have some extraordinary superpowers that enable them to both discern what the president is really thinking, and see into the future.

Others seem to be positively erect at the thought of an Oklahoma City-type attack happening in the near future. Stay classy, gun nuts.


So you don't think a AWB might drive some of the gun loons to commit an OKC like attack? I'm not saying that is necessarily a reason not to do it (AWB) but it might be a good idea to consider the likelihood of that being a consequence.
 
2013-01-16 04:42:16 PM

MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
[world.guns.ru image 597x168]

9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Also make a pistol version
[calicolightweaponsystems.com image 444x184]

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!


Nobody should have those, because they are crappy guns.
 
2013-01-16 04:42:21 PM

MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!


Liberal here, only scared by Calicos because they have terrible sighting arrangements. Sights on the magazine an inch or more above the barrel? Nothankyew. Also, the "stock" magazine for those is only a 50 rounder, the 100 was extra I believe.

Oh, and I have an M950 in my gun safe. Three 50's and one 100 rounder in the bag.
 
2013-01-16 04:42:30 PM

KidneyStone: I have an SKS as well and I could easily fire 35-40 rounds per minute if i load with stripper clips. I must be some kind of superman.


How much practice do you have with that rifle? And is that sitting at a bench at the range or is that when you're chock full of adrenaline, hands shaking, and fumbling to reload from a pouch while standing? Just maneuvering the rifle between a firing position and a reloading position takes at least a second each, meaning a 5-second reload requires you getting a clip from a pouch and getting it into the rifle in three seconds, and you better hope that the clip doesn't bind up on you. I don't dispute that you can get 40 rounds in a minute if you're sitting at a bench with the rifle supported and your clips laid out nicely next to you, but you're not going to be anywhere near that if you're a spree shooter.

Also, I'm not saying it's difficult, I'm saying that it's not on the same level as 100rd detachable box mags. Detachable mags are way easier to use, and I'd imagine that'd only be compounded in a real life-or-death situation where you tend to be way less graceful than you'd normally be.
 
2013-01-16 04:42:41 PM

Corvus: Ow! That was my feelings!: grumpyoldmann: Excuse me 2nd amendment douche bags but it doesn't say a thing about allowing possession of automatic weapons and large capacity magazines. Muzzle loaders and flintlocks satisfy the constitution.
I still say that the victims of accidental shootings should be NRA members or their family. They are ultimately responsible for the over abundance of friendly fire deaths.

Hey, prohibitionist douchebag, the first amendment doesn't say anything about protecting your free speech rights on the internet, STFU.

Oh so then having nuclear weapons is protected by the 2nd amendment?


forums.babypips.com
 
2013-01-16 04:42:44 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: I did specifically mention that there would be no need for a "slaughter of innocents" -- but political representatives engaging in acts of repression would not by definition be "innocents". (And no, I am not suggesting that we are in this scenario just yet).


Right - hence my saying in the modern world, the '2nd amendment solution' could also be referred to as the 'Gabrielle Giffords solution'. Assassinating the policy makers by stealth (sneaking up with a handgun, or maybe sniping from a modified trunk DC Sniper style or something).

You are not talking about pulling together a military group to take control of blocks of land and liberate or subjugate populations, you are talking about private citizens having weapons so they can kill people engaging in acts of repression - like trying to take away their guns? Are high taxes an act of repression?

The problem you seem to have is that 'the 2nd amendment' solution in practice is targeted killings. Giffords assassination style, not Red Dawn. Hence your reluctance to get specific about just who you'd be killing with your guns if we ever did get to 'that scenario'.
 
2013-01-16 04:43:00 PM

CADMonkey79: Uranus Is Huge!: It appears many members of the Fark Militia have some extraordinary superpowers that enable them to both discern what the president is really thinking, and see into the future.

Others seem to be positively erect at the thought of an Oklahoma City-type attack happening in the near future. Stay classy, gun nuts.

So you don't think a AWB might drive some of the gun loons to commit an OKC like attack? I'm not saying that is necessarily a reason not to do it (AWB) but it might be a good idea to consider the likelihood of that being a consequence.


Than ban itself? Probably not, but the enforcement of it probably would.
 
2013-01-16 04:43:22 PM

sugar_fetus: Corvus: ha-ha-guy: Corvus: ha-ha-guy: Corvus: Wait I though Obama was going to ban armed guards at schools. That was what the NRA was telling me.

You mean it was a false dichotomy?

On the flip side, wasn't everyone saying the NRA's idea of armed guards at the school was the dumbest idea on the face of the earth? Yet he included incentives to help schools hire police officers to protect the school.

It is dumb when the NRA said it because no one want's to pay for it. If the NRA is willing to tax guns and bullets to pay for this? If not then it's a BS position because they know it won't happen.

I bet we could solve the budget problem with a tax on TACTICOOL style accessories.

Well if the NRA thought it was such a great idea why weren't the willing to put a tax for it?

How much do you think it would cost to have armed guards at EVERY school in the US?

TOTAL NUMBER OF K-12 SCHOOLS: 132,656 (http://www.edreform.com/2012/04/k-12-facts/)
x
Average Armed Security Officer Salary: $31000. (http://www.indeed.com/salary/Armed-Security-Officer.html)

= 4,112,336,000.00 - not counting overhead.


So, a couple days of Iraq\Afghanistan expenditure?
 
2013-01-16 04:44:06 PM

Of Obama's 23 orders, exactly zero of them would have prevented the Newtown massacre.


No. 13, though, holds some promise, since it's exactly what the NRA has been promoting for the last few decades:

13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
And No. 18 could have been worded a bit more effectively:
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource off-duty police officers
 
2013-01-16 04:44:23 PM
gunwire.thegunwire.netdna-cdn.com
 
2013-01-16 04:44:37 PM

Ow! That was my feelings!: Corvus: Ow! That was my feelings!: grumpyoldmann: Excuse me 2nd amendment douche bags but it doesn't say a thing about allowing possession of automatic weapons and large capacity magazines. Muzzle loaders and flintlocks satisfy the constitution.
I still say that the victims of accidental shootings should be NRA members or their family. They are ultimately responsible for the over abundance of friendly fire deaths.

Hey, prohibitionist douchebag, the first amendment doesn't say anything about protecting your free speech rights on the internet, STFU.

Oh so then having nuclear weapons is protected by the 2nd amendment?


Sorry, how exactly would you use a nuclear weapon to defend yourself, family, property, community, or state if called upon?

You stooges think the nuclear weapon line is oh so clever still? You probably still have an iPhone 3GS. How many cats?
 
2013-01-16 04:44:37 PM
This is really really dumb politically. An assault weapons ban or high cap mag restriction type push from the Dems will hand the house and the presidency back to the republicans for the next decade. This back ground check thing is seriously treading on thin ice. This is probably the dumbest issue they could possibly tackle. I cant believe that the Dems could even be thinking about messing with this hornets nest. Dumb Dumb Dumb!
 
2013-01-16 04:44:48 PM

CADMonkey79: Uranus Is Huge!: It appears many members of the Fark Militia have some extraordinary superpowers that enable them to both discern what the president is really thinking, and see into the future.

Others seem to be positively erect at the thought of an Oklahoma City-type attack happening in the near future. Stay classy, gun nuts.

So you don't think a AWB might drive some of the gun loons to commit an OKC like attack? I'm not saying that is necessarily a reason not to do it (AWB) but it might be a good idea to consider the likelihood of that being a consequence.


I think a serious chemical imbalance might cause someone to commit an atrocity. You're suggesting basing our decision making on the reaction on the unhinged. That's not a plan for governance.
 
2013-01-16 04:45:55 PM

TellarHK: MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!

Liberal here, only scared by Calicos because they have terrible sighting arrangements. Sights on the magazine an inch or more above the barrel? Nothankyew. Also, the "stock" magazine for those is only a 50 rounder, the 100 was extra I believe.

Oh, and I have an M950 in my gun safe. Three 50's and one 100 rounder in the bag.


How weird is the balance on it with 100 9mm rounds loaded?
 
2013-01-16 04:46:06 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Gun ownership should be limited to the types of weapons available when the 2nd amendment was written.


Then your freedom of speech should be limitted to what was available then too:

ts4.mm.bing.net
 
2013-01-16 04:46:25 PM
Any plan that doesn't completely solve the problem within 24 hours should not be considered.
 
2013-01-16 04:46:34 PM

Aphrodisiac: This is really really dumb politically. An assault weapons ban or high cap mag restriction type push from the Dems will hand the house and the presidency back to the republicans for the next decade. This back ground check thing is seriously treading on thin ice. This is probably the dumbest issue they could possibly tackle. I cant believe that the Dems could even be thinking about messing with this hornets nest. Dumb Dumb Dumb!


It would here, it would make me a one issue voter next election. You vote for the assault weapons ban, I'll sit aside all my other issues and vote against you. Simple as that.

/If you rub a dogs nose in its shiat enough times eventually it learns to quit shiatting on the carpet
 
2013-01-16 04:47:26 PM

OgreMagi: Grand_Moff_Joseph: -The ECs are immediate, are well within his authority

That's if you assume the president has the authority to create law with the stroke of his pen and without congressional approval.  Last I checked, only Congress has the power to create laws, the president's job is to enforce them.

/executive orders are an abuse of power that have been going on for far too long


Please identify the specific ECs just signed that create a law where none existed before.
 
2013-01-16 04:47:35 PM

Insatiable Jesus: CliChe Guevara: grumpyoldmann: Excuse me 2nd amendment douche bags but it doesn't say a thing about allowing possession of automatic weapons and large capacity magazines. Muzzle loaders and flintlocks satisfy the constitution.

Actually it says nothing specific about either.

The founders of our country were very, very specific, however in expressing exactly why they put it in there, however, in many letters and speeches of the time. The idea was that the people are not free unless they are armed, and a government with a disarmed populace has no reason to fear the people and cannot be trusted to obey their will. In the constant conflict between whats best for the people and whats best for the rulers, votes of the people can be easily ignored if those people are powerless.
We don't have it for hunting or sport, we have the amendment for defense from invaders and because our own government can't be trusted otherwise. That was the idea; no coups or invasions or dictatorial governments. Can't recall that happening 200+ years of our history.


Puhlease. They keep your ass in line with a TV and you didn't do anything when they shipped half the economy to communist China or created the DHS. And you won't do anything now. Go back to your Fox.


Really? You know that for a fact?
 
2013-01-16 04:47:37 PM

MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
[world.guns.ru image 597x168]

9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Also make a pistol version
[calicolightweaponsystems.com image 444x184]

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!


Neither of those seem to have sights, are they just the embodiment of spray and pray?
 
2013-01-16 04:47:47 PM

stoli n coke: How about requiring a title? That way, if it turns out, you sell a gun to a criminal and that gun is used in a crime, it's on you too.


Why?  Don't we presume innocence until proven guilty?  I doubt that the person who has committed a crime with a gun would register their gun.
 
2013-01-16 04:48:00 PM

TellarHK: Dude, his username is "EvilRacistNaziFascist". Why are you even acknowledging his troll posts at all? Stoppit!


Oh look, somebody else who doesn't understand the concept of irony. I adopted this username because of the multitudes of online halfwits I've encountered who have no argument beyond "you're a racist / Nazi / fascist" etc. -- people utterly lacking in critical thinking skills, but ready at a moment's notice to label anyone they disagree with in the time- honoured fashion of those simple- minded folks who have eagerly denounced heretics throughout the ages. But I apologize if this is too sophisticated for you to grasp.
 
2013-01-16 04:48:13 PM

Loadmaster: Of Obama's 23 orders, exactly zero of them would have prevented the Newtown massacre.


That pleases you?
 
2013-01-16 04:48:20 PM

manimal2878: MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
[world.guns.ru image 597x168]

9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Also make a pistol version
[calicolightweaponsystems.com image 444x184]

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!

Neither of those seem to have sights, are they just the embodiment of spray and pray?


Like he said, it's a "range toy"
 
2013-01-16 04:48:43 PM

Weaver95: oh you should hear Limbaugh today.  He's already said that President Obama's kids shouldn't have guards, and I swear to f*cking god, I thought he was going to actually CRY at one point...the left is mocking the NRA you see.  and these things Obama is proposing have made Limbaugh very angry.


He must have a lot of listeners who use Yahoo, if you read the comments on there the derp is past 11......I'm not sure when the right decided to take over Yahoo comments on stories but they flood that like a mofo now, they might as well link it to WND or Townhall or FR.
 
2013-01-16 04:48:47 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: Any plan that doesn't completely solve the problem within 24 hours should not be considered.


Any plan that results in throwing money down the drain or the costs are not justified should not be considered. Reacting purely emotionally because it is a start is as silly as taking no action because it is a partial solution.
 
2013-01-16 04:48:53 PM

Aphrodisiac: This is really really dumb politically. An assault weapons ban or high cap mag restriction type push from the Dems will hand the house and the presidency back to the republicans for the next decade. This back ground check thing is seriously treading on thin ice. This is probably the dumbest issue they could possibly tackle. I cant believe that the Dems could even be thinking about messing with this hornets nest. Dumb Dumb Dumb!


clearedjobs.net
 
2013-01-16 04:49:10 PM
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers


OMG! Obama wants to put more guns in schools!
 
2013-01-16 04:49:12 PM

Chummer45: The only arguments I have heard are nonsensical, completely disingenuous arguments like "assault rifles are impossible to define" and "an assault rifle is the exact same thing as a typical hunting rifle."


It's because the "assault weapon" criteria that has been used in the past is completely stupid (see my post above), and the past AWB gives little reason to believe that a renewed ban would have any significant impact on crime. The current statistics on crime guns also suggest that assault weapons are rarely used in crime.

Given those two facts alone, the onus is on the gun-control people to explain why these rifles should be made illegal, rather than the gun-rights people to explain why they should be allowed. Just saying because it's not necessary isn't sufficient either- lots of hobbies have questionable or negative net societal value but are not categorically banned.
 
2013-01-16 04:49:13 PM

sugar_fetus: Corvus: ha-ha-guy: Corvus: ha-ha-guy: Corvus: Wait I though Obama was going to ban armed guards at schools. That was what the NRA was telling me.

You mean it was a false dichotomy?

On the flip side, wasn't everyone saying the NRA's idea of armed guards at the school was the dumbest idea on the face of the earth? Yet he included incentives to help schools hire police officers to protect the school.

It is dumb when the NRA said it because no one want's to pay for it. If the NRA is willing to tax guns and bullets to pay for this? If not then it's a BS position because they know it won't happen.

I bet we could solve the budget problem with a tax on TACTICOOL style accessories.

Well if the NRA thought it was such a great idea why weren't the willing to put a tax for it?

How much do you think it would cost to have armed guards at EVERY school in the US?

TOTAL NUMBER OF K-12 SCHOOLS: 132,656 (http://www.edreform.com/2012/04/k-12-facts/)
x
Average Armed Security Officer Salary: $31000. (http://www.indeed.com/salary/Armed-Security-Officer.html)

= 4,112,336,000.00 - not counting overhead.


Many if not most secondary schools already have a resource office AKA cop in the school, so you'd have to subtract those from the total.
 
2013-01-16 04:49:33 PM

JDAT: So encroaching upon your privacy and infringing upon your rights is "reasonable and Constitutional"?

Subby has been skull farked a little too hard.


Or, you could be specific and support your claim.  Either way.
 
2013-01-16 04:49:45 PM
www.hostingbytes.us
 
2013-01-16 04:49:49 PM

WTFDYW: I wish he would have also spoke more about mental health. That's as much if not more of a problems than the guns. This is better than nothing though.


Anything he would have put in place would have been seen as using a tragedy to further Obamacare.
 
2013-01-16 04:50:13 PM
What pisses me off is the "mental health" garbage. That's pure pandering. There is no correlation between mental illness and increased violence. In fact, the mentally ill are more likely to be victims of violence. What DOES correlate to violent behavior are things like drinking alcohol, being male, and being poor (go figure, people hate being poor). The one mental illness that DOES correlate to violence, psychopathy, is very difficult to diagnose. Well, that and Alzheimer's, but that's old people and we love those cuddly old farts even when they get irrationally angry, right?

Tell me, why are we confiscating guns from people who make threats and are mentally ill, but not people who make threats, especially without cause? Do some of us have less citizenry than others?

Any violation of rights lessens the power of our democracy for us ALL.

This is pure pandering. The media has scapegoated mental illness for decades, and politicians are willing to take advantage of a segment of our population who is unable to defend themselves, and we're willing to eat it up in the wake of a tragedy that's difficult to accept.

I find that abhorrent. I find the treatment of the mentally ill in this nation to be repulsive. We shun them. We push them away. We make mental illness terrifying. We paint it as a failure and a weakness. We make people who are mentally ill afraid to talk about it and to seek help. And that leads to a lack of preventative care and adequate care. Other countries, have far less prevalence of mental illness precisely because they are more social, more familial, more supportive, and encourage people with mental illness to go and seek help.

We need to change how we approach mental illness in this country, and how much money we dedicate to it.
 
2013-01-16 04:51:11 PM
As a registered Independent, military vet, and former NRA member (before they became the defacto lobbyists for gun manufacturers): Expanded, standardized background checks == OK with me.

AWB? More of a waste of time than anything else, there's already a brazillion AWs out there. Even if you just limited magazine sizes it would take decades for the existing supply of large mags to wear out.
 
2013-01-16 04:51:20 PM

MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
[world.guns.ru image 597x168]

9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Also make a pistol version
[calicolightweaponsystems.com image 444x184]

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!


No one is afraid of your toys moran. You are pussies that have to be armed to feel safe. Stop with all the projection coward. We are afraid of mentally deranged gun nuts like the ones that have been showing up in all the gun threads.
 
2013-01-16 04:51:23 PM

sugar_fetus: Corvus: ha-ha-guy: Corvus: ha-ha-guy: Corvus: Wait I though Obama was going to ban armed guards at schools. That was what the NRA was telling me.

You mean it was a false dichotomy?

On the flip side, wasn't everyone saying the NRA's idea of armed guards at the school was the dumbest idea on the face of the earth? Yet he included incentives to help schools hire police officers to protect the school.

It is dumb when the NRA said it because no one want's to pay for it. If the NRA is willing to tax guns and bullets to pay for this? If not then it's a BS position because they know it won't happen.

I bet we could solve the budget problem with a tax on TACTICOOL style accessories.

Well if the NRA thought it was such a great idea why weren't the willing to put a tax for it?

How much do you think it would cost to have armed guards at EVERY school in the US?

TOTAL NUMBER OF K-12 SCHOOLS: 132,656 (http://www.edreform.com/2012/04/k-12-facts/)
x
Average Armed Security Officer Salary: $31000. (http://www.indeed.com/salary/Armed-Security-Officer.html)

= 4,112,336,000.00 - not counting overhead.


Thanks for the calc.

So about 4 BILLION dollars. If the NRA said they were willing to tax gun/ammo sells to pay for it, I would take it serious. But since they are not, I think it's a red herring.
 
2013-01-16 04:51:38 PM

manimal2878: MythDragon: How's this for a scary gun?
[world.guns.ru image 597x168]

9mm Calico Carbine. Magazine holds 100 rounds. Standard

Also make a pistol version
[calicolightweaponsystems.com image 444x184]

Calico: Because scaring libs with range toys is fun!

Neither of those seem to have sights, are they just the embodiment of spray and pray?


More like spray and wait for it to jam.

/I've seen them at the range before in the early 90's. They are crap.
 
2013-01-16 04:51:45 PM
Apparently the gun-strokers are no longer happy with no additional regulation. Enforcing existing law is now a gross violation of their right to piss off the libs... or something.
 
Displayed 50 of 1394 comments

First | « | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report