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.

(KSL Salt Lake City)   Law-abiding citizen carries rifle into department store, minds own business, fails to murder anyone. It might take some effort, but we can all still feel threatened and outraged   (ksl.com) divider line 637
    More: Interesting, KSL, rifles, Riverdale, murders, J.C. Penney  
•       •       •

10740 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jan 2013 at 4:54 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-18 09:29:43 AM

untaken_name: Freezer: Fubini: GAT_00: Seriously?  This is how we're all supposed to be safe?  Because I don't know about you, but I worry when rifles are casually carried around.  It implies you expect to use it.

Do you get the vapors when you see police with service pistols?

No, I effin don't, but this dorkus isn't the police. Furthermore, the rest of these wannabe's aren't the army or the malitia, or the police either. Their a bunch of short dicks that haven't got anything better to do. The majority of these turdblossoms have about as much situational training as a can of vienna sausages. Knowing how to fire a weapon does not equal knowing when to fire it.

And it's your contention that police have mastered the "when to fire it" thing? Really? What non-Earth planet do you reside on?


Surely they have. Here in Seattle, it is when they are walking away from you and are whittling with a pocket knife.
 
2013-01-18 09:29:58 AM
I wonder if a jury would convict someone who put down one of these guys because they mistakenly thought they were there for a shooting rampage. It would of course depend on the specific circumstances and who was selected for the jury but I could see someone getting acquitted if it were determined to be a genuine mistake.
 
2013-01-18 09:31:53 AM

Baz the Spaz: In some places, like Israel, this is acceptable.

[www.theblaze.com image 600x449]
[frgdr.com image 850x637]
[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Just sayin'....


Those are all active military personal. I guess your point is US soldiers should walk around armed on American streets?
 
drp
2013-01-18 09:33:01 AM
I own many guns, and am a single issue 2A voter.

This guy probably thinks that by exercising his right to open carry, he's protecting it that right. He is a moron.

A year or two ago, a bunch of California gun owners got the idea that by legally open carrying all the time, they could draw attention to responsible gun ownership and the state's arbitrary, capricious, and unconstitutional concealed carry permit issuing policies (which vary tremendously from county to county). Result: the state banned open carry.

You're not helping, moron.
 
2013-01-18 09:34:31 AM

HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.


You blame the tool, and not the person. So yes, you did, and you have. You are a scared little man afraid of the new technology out there, and people other than the government having those types of tools . Like I said earlier, you would be the caveman protesting against fire. What made you become a big government tool(yes, you are a tool too.)? Seriously? Is it you don't trust yourself, or just hate other people?
 
2013-01-18 09:34:33 AM

maxalt: I'll bet if that happened with a few farkers shopping that the sale of under pants would increase dramatically. Oh wait three problems with that one farkers hardly leave moms basement so they would not be there, also it's not Tuesday so most farkers would not change their under garments under any circumstances.


Interesting commentary from someone using a paid Fark account.
 
2013-01-18 09:35:38 AM

computerguyUT: hinten: muck4doo: hinten: muck4doo: Have a flashlight in your house? You scared of the dark, pussy?

Lighting a room is the same as shooting a human being.

Who told you that? Being unprepared is being unprepared. But you go ahead and trust the government to get that flashlight for you.

The government is my representation and I will do everything in my power to have it represent me in such a fashion that it will not have to be prepared in such a fashion myself. It is simply not my job.

Bahahhahahha this post is PERFECT.
Maybe you can get your free Obamaphone while you're waiting for the government to come over and wipe your bottom for you.


Surely, wiping my ass is the same as outsourcing my protection to someone that knows what they are doing.
 
2013-01-18 09:36:45 AM

This About That: Now, if his dick was hanging out, he would have been arrested.


Doubt it- too small to see, hence the need to parade around like that.
 
2013-01-18 09:36:53 AM

Farkage: Don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly saying what this dude did was the right idea or even a remotely good one. It gets tiring when people that don't like guns constantly imply that if you have one or carry one that you are an insane borderline killer that just can't wait to go all Rambo on some bad guys. Or that we are just one parking ticket away from killing dozens of people. Honestly, it gets tiring. there are 80-100 MILLION of us around in this country, and the vast majority of gun crime happens in inner city gang/drug activity, but I haven't heard anything from the Prez about that. Nothing. But it's "just common sense" to ban a class of firearms barely ever used in crime because it makes people that don't know any better feel good because the scary ones are illegal now. High hapacity mag bans won't change anything, because the people in the cities killing each other fire an average (I believe, correct me if I'm wong) of less than 3 bullets. For the record, I am against ANY law that won't actually fix the problem it is designed to fix. "We feel that this will" is not fixing it. It is pretending to do something.


I keep reading this same sentiment and I have to say it's absurd. The idea that law enforcement and the Justice Department doesn't do anything about inner city crime is simply false.

I see people pull this argument out in the same threads they cite statistics showing falling violent crime rates.

Plus if you want to do something, my answer is to start a focus on handguns. Want to guess how that plays with the people complaining about how assault rifles aren't the "Real" problem?
 
2013-01-18 09:37:40 AM

drp: I own many guns, and am a single issue 2A voter.

This guy probably thinks that by exercising his right to open carry, he's protecting it that right. He is a moron.

A year or two ago, a bunch of California gun owners got the idea that by legally open carrying all the time, they could draw attention to responsible gun ownership and the state's arbitrary, capricious, and unconstitutional concealed carry permit issuing policies (which vary tremendously from county to county). Result: the state banned open carry.

You're not helping, moron.


It was the 60's and a bunch of scary black men called the "Black Panther" party that open carried on sacramento that got the state to put in those draconian laws. Learn the history right.
 
2013-01-18 09:37:49 AM

Baz the Spaz: In some places, like Israel, this is acceptable.

[www.theblaze.com image 600x449]
[frgdr.com image 850x637]
[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Just sayin'....


Sure.  But, they are trained, living in a country that's perpetually at war, and, most importantly, look at their muzzles as opposed to this imbecile, for example:
img.ksl.com

When a Middle Eastern girl has better gun smarts than your dumb American ass, you really should not be walking around with the damn thing.
 
2013-01-18 09:38:55 AM

muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.

You blame the tool, and not the person.


False. I don't believe you're actually reading my posts.
 
2013-01-18 09:39:46 AM

hinten: Best argument for gun control yet. The percentage of gun owners that can make all of what you describe here happen is exceedingly small. Fark is an excellent proof for that. The risk of unqualified people wielding power at the risk of others is too high.
A little bit like the right to vote but I am not willing to give that up yet.


Not really. The problem isn't gun control. In part, idiots like this are "exercising their rights" because of the ridiculousness of the debate on guns.

The difficulty is weapons aren't the real issue. The real issue is crime. BOTH sides of the gun control debate, are concerned with crime. Well, not the NRA, as they are looking to boost sales and memberships, but when we talk about gun control, we are actually talking about crime and accidents. The problem is that folks are focused on the tools, and not the REAL problems.

You want to reduce crime in this country--violent crime that is--then we need to focus on the causes and factors that lead folks down that road. That means taking a hard look at economic policy, economic mobility, education, drug policy, health care both mental and physical, and matters of social justice. Those are really hard issues. Those mean taking a long look in a deep, dark truthful mirror, and no one wants a Big Bowl of Truth in their living room. It invites way too much introspection and it would mean sacrificing some very hard held myths that Americans hold dear. About "opportunity" about "fairness" and about what sort of society that we've created.

It's a lot easier to focus on the tools, and to equate the tools used in these crimes with "freedom" and load the debate with a lot of other crap that means that we can focus on ANYTHING else but the fact that we've pooped in our own dog dish, and not have to face cleaning it up.

Gun control is a useless debate. Because it addresses nothing but the tools used in the commission of crimes, and does nothing to alleviate the reasons and conditions that folks turn to those crimes in the first place. It is essentially slapping a band aid over a suppurating wound and figuring so long as it's covered, it's cool, right?

In part, we are having pangs, as we move from a responsibility based culture, to a more face based culture. Folks want the appearance of responsibility, while ducking them at every opportunity, so long as it looks good, we're fine with it. A family man, a law and order type of lawmaker is fine, up until it's discovered that he likes hookers and is embezzling, and that only blows up when he's caught red handed, and even THEN folks will line up because he sounded nice, you know, up until folks realize that he was a hypocritical douche. That is far more the issue than just the tools. We need to take some responsibility for the culture that we've created, and the conditions that we put ourselves in. Arguing about the tools does nothing to alleviate them, and it only provides distraction from the hard work that we need to do--which, I suppose is sort of the point. Far better to argue about guns and freedom, than look at why we waste so much cash on OTHER things, not while folks can keep dangling "FREEEEEDOM" as a easy to digest concept, while legislating the crap out of it...
 
2013-01-18 09:40:50 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Farkage: Don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly saying what this dude did was the right idea or even a remotely good one. It gets tiring when people that don't like guns constantly imply that if you have one or carry one that you are an insane borderline killer that just can't wait to go all Rambo on some bad guys. Or that we are just one parking ticket away from killing dozens of people. Honestly, it gets tiring. there are 80-100 MILLION of us around in this country, and the vast majority of gun crime happens in inner city gang/drug activity, but I haven't heard anything from the Prez about that. Nothing. But it's "just common sense" to ban a class of firearms barely ever used in crime because it makes people that don't know any better feel good because the scary ones are illegal now. High hapacity mag bans won't change anything, because the people in the cities killing each other fire an average (I believe, correct me if I'm wong) of less than 3 bullets. For the record, I am against ANY law that won't actually fix the problem it is designed to fix. "We feel that this will" is not fixing it. It is pretending to do something.

I keep reading this same sentiment and I have to say it's absurd. The idea that law enforcement and the Justice Department doesn't do anything about inner city crime is simply false.

I see people pull this argument out in the same threads they cite statistics showing falling violent crime rates.

Plus if you want to do something, my answer is to start a focus on handguns. Want to guess how that plays with the people complaining about how assault rifles aren't the "Real" problem?


So you are now admitting the "Assault Rifle" ban is now silly?
 
2013-01-18 09:41:32 AM

Bladel: I wonder what would happen if two such asshats would target the same store on the same day for this stunt.

Would the immediately recognize each other as kindred souls?

Or more likely, would they both assume the other was coming for their gun, and turn the Food Court in to a 21st Century OK Coral?


They'd try and find the nearest men's room so that they could discuss their mutual 'wide stance' on open carry.
 
2013-01-18 09:41:39 AM
Sad that he's using such a crap-tastic looking firearm. Seriously, Magpul makes their accessories in lots-o-colors for a reason, so you can coordinate all your pieces. It's fine for the upper and lower to be black, but for the love of fashion man, OD green vert foregrip and Pmag with everything else black? Have you no taste!

Also, that sling.... ugh... Get a 1 point and hang it the way it's meant to be hung!
 
2013-01-18 09:42:40 AM

HotWingConspiracy: muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.

You blame the tool, and not the person.

False. I don't believe you're actually reading my posts.


Fair enough. You said a lot of derp in this thread, but I'll let you explain your position now.
 
2013-01-18 09:42:59 AM

muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: Farkage: Don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly saying what this dude did was the right idea or even a remotely good one. It gets tiring when people that don't like guns constantly imply that if you have one or carry one that you are an insane borderline killer that just can't wait to go all Rambo on some bad guys. Or that we are just one parking ticket away from killing dozens of people. Honestly, it gets tiring. there are 80-100 MILLION of us around in this country, and the vast majority of gun crime happens in inner city gang/drug activity, but I haven't heard anything from the Prez about that. Nothing. But it's "just common sense" to ban a class of firearms barely ever used in crime because it makes people that don't know any better feel good because the scary ones are illegal now. High hapacity mag bans won't change anything, because the people in the cities killing each other fire an average (I believe, correct me if I'm wong) of less than 3 bullets. For the record, I am against ANY law that won't actually fix the problem it is designed to fix. "We feel that this will" is not fixing it. It is pretending to do something.

I keep reading this same sentiment and I have to say it's absurd. The idea that law enforcement and the Justice Department doesn't do anything about inner city crime is simply false.

I see people pull this argument out in the same threads they cite statistics showing falling violent crime rates.

Plus if you want to do something, my answer is to start a focus on handguns. Want to guess how that plays with the people complaining about how assault rifles aren't the "Real" problem?

So you are now admitting the "Assault Rifle" ban is now silly?


An assault rifle ban isn't a gun ban. You can still own guns.
 
2013-01-18 09:43:11 AM

muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.

You blame the tool, and not the person. So yes, you did, and you have. You are a scared little man afraid of the new technology out there, and people other than the government having those types of tools . Like I said earlier, you would be the caveman protesting against fire. What made you become a big government tool(yes, you are a tool too.)? Seriously? Is it you don't trust yourself, or just hate other people?


I wish people would realize how silly this argument is. No one actually thinks it's the gun and not the person who is responsible for gun violence. No one blames the tool over the individual. It's a straw man argument.
 
2013-01-18 09:43:48 AM

Tat'dGreaser: Xenomech: Rifles are for longer range fire. You'd want a sub-machinegun or a combat shotgun if you're going toe-to-toe with baddies around tight corners in between the aisles of a department store.

I don't know, the US military thinks differently.


It does not appear so. It seems they prefer a carbine over a rifle for close quarters combat.

Other military or police groups specializing in close quarters combat (e.g. SWAT, Canadian special forces) don't appear to think differently either.
 
2013-01-18 09:44:23 AM

violentsalvation: I see people in stores with pistols on their belts fairly often and unless they look like they just got off a horse and are looking for new Levis I usually think ATTENTION WHORE. It doesn't bother me, it isn't news-worthy. But I know it bothers some people. And then there's these jackoffs who don't think a pistol is enough, they have to bring out the AR. Cocksuckers are so assholish with their rights that they would scare others into voting the rights away.


I guess I just don't get it. I live way out in deep flyover country, where guns are an everyday way of life. Most people (including myself and my children) grow up around guns and learn how to use them at an early age. It's a pretty good bet that 9 out of 10 homes around me have multiple guns inside them. I know at least a dozen people with concealed carry permits. Do you know how many guns I see out in public on an average day? NONE. Zero. Zip. Nada. I don't think I've EVER seen someone walking around town with a pistol on their belt, much less with an AR on their shoulder. Pretty much the only time you see guns out in public is during hunting season, and then it's usually tourists in blaze orange showing off their $5,000 shotgun that they will use once and then put into storage. The guys that I know who have CC permits have them so that they can keep their handgun in the glove box in the pickup in case they see a coon (not that kind, ya racist), skunk, coyote, etc. I know that there is a perception out there that rural South Dakota is kind of the Wild West, but it seems like it's mostly idiots in urban areas that like to walk around like it's the 1800's and they're deep in Injun territory.

I'm what Fark would consider a gun nut. I own several, love to hunt and shoot for fun, and I oppose the AWB. I still don't get idiots like this. I like my guns and don't want to give them up, but I don't go around brandishing them in public like I'm Wild Bill Hickok. People like that make me nervous.

//fun fact: We used to have an anchor lady on our local news named Lexy Hickok, who was a direct descendent of Wild Bill.
 
2013-01-18 09:44:48 AM

Turbo Cojones: keylock71: "Look everyone!! My guns are fashion accessories!!"

People like this guy in the story just sound like a bunch of chicken shiat wannabe tough guys.

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 470x616]

"Honey? I'm going to Walmart... They're having a sale on fudge cake. Need me to pick you up same tampons?"

"Shotgun News" reader?


Heh... I'm sure he subscribes to many magazines about guns.

Don't get me wrong, I love shooting. Love shooting clay pigeons and target shooting and I've had my F.I.D. card since I was 19, but guys like the clown in the article and the dough boy in that picture just make firearm owners look ridiculous... And the NRA, in order to increase sales for gun manufacturers (The NRA's real constituency), pander to these scared shiatless clowns.

I can pretty much guarantee the violent crime rate in my city is higher than where ever that idiot was in Utah, yet, I've never felt the need to carry my firearms around with me when I walk down to the shop to get some eggs.

Like I said, these idiots look at their firearms like fashion accessories... some sort of projection of their manhood. It's pretty pathetic.
 
2013-01-18 09:46:38 AM

muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.

You blame the tool, and not the person.

False. I don't believe you're actually reading my posts.

Fair enough. You said a lot of derp in this thread, but I'll let you explain your position now.


Well my Boobies was pointing out that the man that is responsible today might not be tomorrow.

The problem is people, which is why I support background checks, mental health evals, etc.

No more loopholes, no more bullshiat.

So in essence my notion of gun control is access control.
 
2013-01-18 09:46:45 AM

HotWingConspiracy: An assault rifle ban isn't a gun ban. You can still own guns.


facepalm. Everything i said about you is correct
 
2013-01-18 09:47:04 AM

HotWingConspiracy: I keep reading this same sentiment and I have to say it's absurd. The idea that law enforcement and the Justice Department doesn't do anything about inner city crime is simply false.

I see people pull this argument out in the same threads they cite statistics showing falling violent crime rates.

Plus if you want to do something, my answer is to start a focus on handguns. Want to guess how that plays with the people complaining about how assault rifles aren't the "Real" problem?


I believe you missed my point. If "Assault Weapons" aren't the problem, why are people screaming to ban them? If Law abiding permit holders aren't the problem, why are people trying to restrict their rights?
I didn't say law enforcement isn't working on inner city crime. I didn't even imply that. What I said was the Prez didn't say or do anything to solve it.
Please come up with some ideas on how to prevent criminals from getting weapons and I will honestly listen. (I do mean that!) Saying that limiting magazines I own to no more than 10 rounds will stop inner city gangs from killing each other is silly at best.
True story: A guy I grew up with was a convicted felon (armed robbery, used a knife I believe). He had 6 DWIs as well and had been previously busted on drug charges. He got caught across state lines (he lived in New York) in New Canaan, CT driving drunk with a loaded .44 revolver in the back seat. They gave him a year in jail and a $1000 fine. Think about that...a convicted felon, driving drunk, that carried a loaded gun (already illegal for him to posess) across state lines, and they in essence told him to promise not to be a bad boy anymore. Please tell me you see a problem here.
 
MFK
2013-01-18 09:48:06 AM

Baz the Spaz: In some places, like Israel, this is acceptable.

[www.theblaze.com image 600x449]
[frgdr.com image 850x637]
[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Just sayin'....


You will notice that all of those pictures featuring ACTUAL SOLDIERS have one thing in common that sets them apart from our douchebag at JC Pennys and that is that their weapons are clearly unloaded.
 
2013-01-18 09:48:09 AM

moothemagiccow: Oh no wait, the gun is actually more likely to kill you, your family, or your neighbors than the boogieman or the fire. Imagine that.


That is a BS statistic that includes suicides. Suicidal people will find a way to kill themselves with or without a gun. Lack of treatment is the issue in those cases, not the presence of a inanimate object. What happens when you compare the amount of "accidental" shootings to the likelihood of being a victim of violent crime? Home invasions resulting in death of the home owner are a weekly occurrence here, we had one two days ago. Statistically it is not likely to have an invasion in your home, but it is absurd to act like it does not occur and even worse to shame people that have decided to give themselves he option to defend themselves.
 
2013-01-18 09:49:23 AM

muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: An assault rifle ban isn't a gun ban. You can still own guns.

facepalm. Everything i said about you is correct


My logic is unassailable.
 
2013-01-18 09:50:45 AM

Xenomech: It does not appear so. It seems they prefer a carbine over a rifle for close quarters combat.

Other military or police groups specializing in close quarters combat (e.g. SWAT, Canadian special forces) don't appear to think differently either.


Ummm you don't know what a carbine is do you?
 
2013-01-18 09:51:30 AM

thaylin: That is opinion on how rights work. Another way and one I personally describe to is that when you have a right, you can voluntarily give it up by doing something, such as entering a store, but only iff (if and only if) the store requires you too. If the store does not require you to give up the right when you enter it then you don't lose the right and maintain it.


Can't argue with that logic... because it makes no sense. No one can "require" you to give up your rights. You can waive your rights, or someone can violate them. Laws cannot proscribe rights. If a law can limit your behavior without violating your rights, you didn't have a right to the behavior in the first place.

You do not have the right to carry a weapon into a private residence or place of business without the owner's consent. Period. You also don't have the right to open carry, or concealed carry a loaded firearm. You are allowed these privileges by law in some places.

way south: The question is whether he would make a motion to use his rifle (or the handgun at his side) when you approach him. Because you'll have to commit to murder if he does.


What the hell are you talking about? Attempting to draw a slung or holstered firearm when you've already lost the initiative and are standing at barrel's end is about the quickest way to die I can think of. You're saying THAT's what a highly-trained civilian gun owner is likely to do!? What you're proposing is ridiculous. It presupposes rational behavior on the part of the criminal, and irrational behavior on the part of the victim.

Is a rifle worth twenty years in the pen?

10 for armed robbery/assault with a deadly vs. 20 for murder? Two stories, vs. one? Seems like a wash to me. But this is irrelevant. Your assailant has already drawn on you. He can kill you any time he wishes. Your slung rifle is not only useless, it's a liability. And it was never anything BUT a liability for the purpose of self-defense.
 
2013-01-18 09:51:56 AM

TommyymmoT: You must have to be a complete pussy to feel the need to carry a rifle just to go buy socks.


Pretty much this. It must suck to go through life being so scared and paranoid.
 
2013-01-18 09:53:53 AM

hubiestubert: Callous: Abacus9: Gyrfalcon: Why do you need an assault rifle to go shopping? No, seriously. Bearing in mind that a weapon is only useful if it is in your hands when you need it, realistically speaking, why do you need a rifle when you're shopping?

What I always find odd is that they always just answer with: "I don't NEED it, but it's my RIGHT to carry it!" Seriously, when did grown adults start acting like this. Doing something just because you can, for no good reason.

Tell me about it.  This shiat really creeps some people out.

[static.guim.co.uk image 460x276]

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x480]


Got anything better than insults?

Didn't think so...
 
2013-01-18 09:55:15 AM

Farkage: HotWingConspiracy: I keep reading this same sentiment and I have to say it's absurd. The idea that law enforcement and the Justice Department doesn't do anything about inner city crime is simply false.

I see people pull this argument out in the same threads they cite statistics showing falling violent crime rates.

Plus if you want to do something, my answer is to start a focus on handguns. Want to guess how that plays with the people complaining about how assault rifles aren't the "Real" problem?

I believe you missed my point. If "Assault Weapons" aren't the problem, why are people screaming to ban them?


Assault weapons are "a" problem, and what "the" problem is is a matter of opinion.

If Law abiding permit holders aren't the problem, why are people trying to restrict their rights?

I don't know what to say aside from laws are generally written for the lowest common denominator. I'd like to use my phone when I drive, I'm confident in my ability to do it. But I can't where I live because it's illegal. Why is it illegal? Because idiots that aren't very good at driving and talking are dangerous for everyone else. So now I'm restricted due to idiots. This is true of MANY laws.

I didn't say law enforcement isn't working on inner city crime. I didn't even imply that. What I said was the Prez didn't say or do anything to solve it.

Yes, I disagree.

Please come up with some ideas on how to prevent criminals from getting weapons and I will honestly listen. (I do mean that!)

Limiting access is a good start.

True story: A guy I grew up with was a convicted felon (armed robbery, used a knife I believe). He had 6 DWIs as well and had been previously busted on drug charges. He got caught across state lines (he lived in New York) in New Canaan, CT driving drunk with a loaded .44 revolver in the back seat. They gave him a year in jail and a $1000 fine. Think about that...a convicted felon, driving drunk, that carried a loaded gun (already illegal for him to posess) across state lines, and they in essence told him to promise not to be a bad boy anymore. Please tell me you see a problem here.

Doesn't sound very common honestly. I guess he's lucky?
 
2013-01-18 09:58:04 AM

Robert Farker: muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.

You blame the tool, and not the person. So yes, you did, and you have. You are a scared little man afraid of the new technology out there, and people other than the government having those types of tools . Like I said earlier, you would be the caveman protesting against fire. What made you become a big government tool(yes, you are a tool too.)? Seriously? Is it you don't trust yourself, or just hate other people?

I wish people would realize how silly this argument is. No one actually thinks it's the gun and not the person who is responsible for gun violence. No one blames the tool over the individual. It's a straw man argument.


Then why are the proposing a ban on the tool?
 
2013-01-18 09:58:38 AM

Tat'dGreaser: Xenomech: It does not appear so. It seems they prefer a carbine over a rifle for close quarters combat.

Other military or police groups specializing in close quarters combat (e.g. SWAT, Canadian special forces) don't appear to think differently either.

Ummm you don't know what a carbine is do you?


A carbine is like a rifle -- they're both longarms -- but shorter.  Their smaller size makes them easier to wield in close combat.
 
2013-01-18 09:59:36 AM

Callous: hubiestubert: Callous: Abacus9: Gyrfalcon: Why do you need an assault rifle to go shopping? No, seriously. Bearing in mind that a weapon is only useful if it is in your hands when you need it, realistically speaking, why do you need a rifle when you're shopping?

What I always find odd is that they always just answer with: "I don't NEED it, but it's my RIGHT to carry it!" Seriously, when did grown adults start acting like this. Doing something just because you can, for no good reason.

Tell me about it.  This shiat really creeps some people out.

[static.guim.co.uk image 460x276]

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 640x480]

Got anything better than insults?

Didn't think so...




lh4.googleusercontent.com
 
2013-01-18 10:01:24 AM
He's lucky someone didn't decide to "stand their ground" against him for feeling threatened.
 
2013-01-18 10:02:44 AM

ThunderPelvis: I'm curious why he wasn't kicked the fark out of the store. There's no way I'd put up with that shiat in my place of business.


A JC Penny's is not YOUR place of business...even if you're the manager...
You're bound by CORPORATE rules and if corporate rules dictate they're ok with Utah's open carry law, then no, biatch...you wouldn't have said shiat to him except, "Will that be all, sir?" as you rang up his order.
 
2013-01-18 10:04:13 AM

Rawhead Rex: You're bound by CORPORATE rules


LOL
 
2013-01-18 10:04:27 AM

HotWingConspiracy: muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.

You blame the tool, and not the person.

False. I don't believe you're actually reading my posts.

Fair enough. You said a lot of derp in this thread, but I'll let you explain your position now.

Well my Boobies was pointing out that the man that is responsible today might not be tomorrow.

The problem is people, which is why I support background checks, mental health evals, etc.

No more loopholes, no more bullshiat.

So in essence my notion of gun control is access control.


Look, I know you mean well. You don't want to see kids getting killed, and neither do I. It breaks our hearts. When i get attacked(yes, i take attacks on gun owners personally, funny as they may be), I do get nasty back. In the end this gets us nowhere. You know that. I know that. Nobody wants to see kids getting killed. Mental health is a good start, but I have many questions on how that approach will be taken. Ask for treatment for PSTD? Does that mean vets can't get access to guns? Start banning violence in media? How come there was no problem with it till recently? Guns have been around a long time, and semi-autos for over a century. These types of things didn't start happening until recently(Charles Whitman). Since then there have been too many copy cats. Did you see these tpes of incidents happening in the 50's or 40's? Not much during the 70's. Or 80's. Something is wrong and sick in this society today. It's not my place to say exactly what it is, and neither is it yours. But with dialogue everyone can start to try to figure it out. It's not the guns though. They were there before, they are there now, and will always be. It's like blaming a crime on a hammer, rather than try to figure out what the hell went wrong with the person that used it in a murderous manner.
 
2013-01-18 10:06:23 AM

Rawhead Rex: ThunderPelvis: I'm curious why he wasn't kicked the fark out of the store. There's no way I'd put up with that shiat in my place of business.

A JC Penny's is not YOUR place of business...even if you're the manager...
You're bound by CORPORATE rules and if corporate rules dictate they're ok with Utah's open carry law, then no, biatch...you wouldn't have said shiat to him except, "Will that be all, sir?" as you rang up his order.


I SERIOUSLY doubt JCPenny has a corporate rule stating that. Or any department store for that matter that isn't a sporting goods store. I'm also not sure you understand what a store manager's job is.
 
2013-01-18 10:07:17 AM
Well.... If any crazed killer walked in to massacre everybody, he'd be the first target.
 
drp
2013-01-18 10:07:25 AM

muck4doo: drp: I own many guns, and am a single issue 2A voter.

This guy probably thinks that by exercising his right to open carry, he's protecting it that right. He is a moron.

A year or two ago, a bunch of California gun owners got the idea that by legally open carrying all the time, they could draw attention to responsible gun ownership and the state's arbitrary, capricious, and unconstitutional concealed carry permit issuing policies (which vary tremendously from county to county). Result: the state banned open carry.

You're not helping, moron.

It was the 60's and a bunch of scary black men called the "Black Panther" party that open carried on sacramento that got the state to put in those draconian laws. Learn the history right.


Uh, I'm referring to the ban on open unloaded handgun carry in October 2011 and the subsequent ban of unloaded open carry of rifles and shotguns in August 2012.

Learn current events right.
 
2013-01-18 10:08:46 AM
Walk up behind him, stick your finger in his back, take his weapons and then say, "looky here, my finger is badder than your weapons".
 
2013-01-18 10:09:58 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Please come up with some ideas on how to prevent criminals from getting weapons and I will honestly listen. (I do mean that!)

Limiting access is a good start.


I suppose limiting the access for criminals is what you meant? Provide specifics that don't f*ck over us law abiding permit holders with useless feel-good "ban stuff" laws please.
 
2013-01-18 10:10:48 AM

hubiestubert: hinten: Best argument for gun control yet. The percentage of gun owners that can make all of what you describe here happen is exceedingly small. Fark is an excellent proof for that. The risk of unqualified people wielding power at the risk of others is too high.
A little bit like the right to vote but I am not willing to give that up yet.

Not really. The problem isn't gun control. In part, idiots like this are "exercising their rights" because of the ridiculousness of the debate on guns.

The difficulty is weapons aren't the real issue. The real issue is crime. BOTH sides of the gun control debate, are concerned with crime. Well, not the NRA, as they are looking to boost sales and memberships, but when we talk about gun control, we are actually talking about crime and accidents. The problem is that folks are focused on the tools, and not the REAL problems.

You want to reduce crime in this country--violent crime that is--then we need to focus on the causes and factors that lead folks down that road. That means taking a hard look at economic policy, economic mobility, education, drug policy, health care both mental and physical, and matters of social justice. Those are really hard issues. Those mean taking a long look in a deep, dark truthful mirror, and no one wants a Big Bowl of Truth in their living room. It invites way too much introspection and it would mean sacrificing some very hard held myths that Americans hold dear. About "opportunity" about "fairness" and about what sort of society that we've created.

It's a lot easier to focus on the tools, and to equate the tools used in these crimes with "freedom" and load the debate with a lot of other crap that means that we can focus on ANYTHING else but the fact that we've pooped in our own dog dish, and not have to face cleaning it up.

Gun control is a useless debate. Because it addresses nothing but the tools used in the commission of crimes, and does nothing to alleviate the reasons and conditions that folks t ...



Having less of a tool does not change the amount of usage of that tool? Sure, I get it.
 
2013-01-18 10:12:54 AM

Ilmarinen: numbquil: At this current time, in our country The United States of America, it is not culturally acceptable to walk around with an AR-15 on your back.

When and where has it ever been? You talk as if the US is the exception.


There have been many ages throughout history in which is was perfectly acceptable for a gentleman to carry around the particular arms that were popular at the time whether it be a sword, dagger, or projectile weapon. I said it in that particular manner because I hope that someday it will be culturally acceptable to carry arms in public. Even the scary looking ones. Simply carrying a firearm on your back does not pose a danger to yourself or others around you. Until it becomes acceptable I still consider anyone doing it for shock value to be an asshole.
 
2013-01-18 10:13:09 AM

MFK: Baz the Spaz: In some places, like Israel, this is acceptable.

[www.theblaze.com image 600x449]
[frgdr.com image 850x637]
[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Just sayin'....

You will notice that all of those pictures featuring ACTUAL SOLDIERS have one thing in common that sets them apart from our douchebag at JC Pennys and that is that their weapons are clearly unloaded.


You know, I'd be okay if these gun owners wanted to carry their precious guns around with them so long as they were unloaded.  I don't think I'd have a problem with that.  I know the argument will be that an unloaded gun is useless and less safe since it takes so long to load should some event arise where said owner can fulfill his hero fantasy. But, then you think about the argument against limiting clip sizes and how they preach that it only takes scant seconds to install a clip and that limiting their size really doesn't matter.

So, which is it going to be?

Is it too much to ask that the gun just not be loaded if you feel you need to showcase it in public?

I think Americans could accept that.  I think people would feel a lot better knowing that yeah, the guy's got a gun, but it's not loaded, as opposed to not knowing who the guy is, his mental state, his training, the safety status of his weapon, the reason he's carrying it, or anything.
 
2013-01-18 10:13:16 AM

CADMonkey79: Robert Farker: muck4doo: HotWingConspiracy: That's silly, I never said that.

You blame the tool, and not the person. So yes, you did, and you have. You are a scared little man afraid of the new technology out there, and people other than the government having those types of tools . Like I said earlier, you would be the caveman protesting against fire. What made you become a big government tool(yes, you are a tool too.)? Seriously? Is it you don't trust yourself, or just hate other people?

I wish people would realize how silly this argument is. No one actually thinks it's the gun and not the person who is responsible for gun violence. No one blames the tool over the individual. It's a straw man argument.

Then why are the proposing a ban on the tool?


It's obvious they are trying to keep them out of the hands of people who would use them to kill others and commit crimes.
 
2013-01-18 10:13:32 AM

drp: I own many guns, and am a single issue 2A voter.


Seriously? Given all of the problems this country has right now... the economy, overseas conflict, trade issues, energy dependence, education, the erosion of government representation through corporate influence... the gun issue trumps all of the others combined when you're looking for a candidate to vote for?

Sorry... I recognize that you're trying to be rational about the issue in TFA, but that makes me kinda facepalm-y. Single-issue voting is bad, no matter what the issue is.

muck4doo: You blame the tool, and not the person.


It's not an either/or proposition.
 
Displayed 50 of 637 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report