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.

(Gawker)   Gun Appreciation Day celebrated with accidental shootings at two different gun shows   (gawker.com) divider line 639
    More: Obvious, Gun Appreciation, North Carolina, shootings, guns  
•       •       •

7874 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jan 2013 at 10:18 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



639 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
 
2013-01-20 01:58:48 AM

Frank N Stein: It's not even a real class.They're just rifles. I can't speak for other people's conspiracy theories and whatnot, but as someone that *doesn't* own an "assault rifle", I don't want to see them banned. Not only is it pointless, considering that they only account for some 3% of homicides, but I also believe it to be a stepping stone to further gun control.


Also, it's not just rifles. They only talk about rifles, but the definition of 'assault weapon' includes semi-auto shotguns with so much as a pistol grip, or pistols with a threaded barrel. The latter means that a Walther P22 .22 caliber semi-auto handgun is considered an 'assault weapon' in CA because it has a threaded barrel. A normal, humdrum semi-auto shotgun becomes a baby killing murder machine by adding a pistol grip to it.
 
2013-01-20 01:59:56 AM

PaLarkin: Keizer_Ghidorah: PaLarkin: The gun control crowd wants to ban guns because criminals use them to kill people and idiots who own one but aren't careful with it cause accidents that hurt or kill people.

The extremists, you mean. Everyone else only wants some regulation, some better training and knowledge of safety, maybe getting rid of the assault-type weapons that you don't reasonably need unless you're a collector or something, because going hunting or protecting your home with a machine gun seems a little extreme. You'll still have pistols and handguns and shotguns and other non-assault-type guns.

But people like you seem to think that any attempt to address and perhaps reduce the amount of gun-based violence and death = "OBAMA AND DA LIBS TAKE ALL MAH GUNZ AWAAAAAAAAAY!!", and thus refuse to think rationally and do anything helpful.

You're wrong. There are other ways to deal with gun violence other than taking away peoples' second amendment rights. When someone commits a gun crime, don't give them a slap on the wrist sentence and turn them loose.

Also some people want guns to protect themselves. There was the case a few days ago in Georgia. A woman was home with her kids when some guy started trying to force the door open. She took the kids, went upstairs and hid with a gun. She called her husband. He picked up another phone and called 911. While he was on the phone with the 911 operator, the bad guy found the woman and kids. On the tape you can hear the man telling the operator his wife is shooting at the guy. The cops didn't get there until after the woman finished shooting the guy. He was dead when the cops got there.

If she did not have a gun, she would not have been able to defend herself and the guy might have killed her and the kids.

Look at the anti smoking movement. Forty years ago you could smoke anywhere, in airplanes, in restaurants and just about anywhere else. Now look at all the places where smoking is banned. Look at the taxes ...


And there you go again with the "take away second Amendment rights", still convinced that you're going to lose ALL of your guns when we're talking about SPECIFIC guns. And then you wonder why people think you're all paranoid.

For the record, I've posted a list of several ways I feel that this issue can be addressed many times in many threads, and only one has to do with regulation (NOTE: regulation, not banning). However, everything I suggest gets brushed off because "It's too expensive", "It'll never happen", "It's still infringing my rights in one way or another", or someone goes off on an unrelated thing that has nothing to do with it as a way to reject them.

So, honestly, I don't know what we can do. If you want the status quo to remain and have blood and death be the price to pay for having a gun, then fine. Let's do absolutely nothing about this. It seems to be the American way to deal with anything these days.
 
2013-01-20 02:02:18 AM

Dimensio: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Hey, gun nuts. Here's the secret tactic we who favor more gun regulation are using on you.

We say we don't need any more of these:

[www.bushmaster.com image 850x302]

or thirty round magazines or hundred round drums and you start up on cosmetics and ammo and tech specs and a lot of anal retentive bs and generally go fnckin' nuts.

The vast middle moderate majority sees that and says, "Those people are fnckin' nuts."

It's got nothing to do with banning "assault weapons" and everything to do with discrediting you.

So keep up the good work.

Thank you for admitting that you are intentionally relying upon dishonest tactics, rather than working to improve public safety. Few firearm restriction advocates admit such freely.


This.
 
2013-01-20 02:03:11 AM

Frank N Stein: Confabulat: What ARE you getting at? I am happily ignorant of guns for the most part, because my penis is of normal size, but i grew up in a hunting family and I can see the use of a gun for that sort of activity. You could put that in a grey area I think, wiser men that me could sort that out. But there's plenty of other legal weaponry out there that there's no such grey area--they exist only to kill people, and lots of them.

I'm just saying, if those weapons are "extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" than why does your local police force carry them in most of there squad cars?


If I had to guess, I'd say they're for killing people.
 
2013-01-20 02:03:32 AM

Fubini: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Of course you mean last year.

Yeah, last year was a banner year for psychos that want to kill random people. Doesn't mean anything substantive has changed.

Like I said above, when you have 0-2 of these events yearly it's hard to tell whether having 4 of them means something is different or it's just a blip. I don't mean to sound crass, but when you're talking about restricting rights that 80 million Americans use you better be damn sure it's not just a blip.


Among those 80 million are the mother, friend and neighbor who got those guys their guns as well as Holmes himself plus the daily doofus that accidentally shoots himself or his kid and all the other idiots we never hear about who just hit inanimate objects or threaten their wives.

God knows what the percentage is, you say ten, I'll say ninety.
 
2013-01-20 02:06:12 AM
A sincere question to gun enthusiasts:

What actions do you think that we, as a country, can take to minimize incidents like Newtown and Aurora without enacting stricter gun regulations?

/And don't give me that video games and Marilyn Manson bullshiat
 
2013-01-20 02:08:10 AM

Keizer_Ghidorah: And there you go again with the "take away second Amendment rights", still convinced that you're going to lose ALL of your guns when we're talking about SPECIFIC guns. And then you wonder why people think you're all paranoid.


This is like saying that we're not censoring all speech, just "hate speech". Then we free speech nuts point out hate "hate speech" actually covers a lot of seemingly normal speech when spoken in an angry tone, and has expanded to cover more and more speech over time.

Gee, why we would resist this attempt to ban merely a class of firearms?
 
2013-01-20 02:10:46 AM

Snatch Bandergrip: A sincere question to gun enthusiasts:

What actions do you think that we, as a country, can take to minimize incidents like Newtown and Aurora without enacting stricter gun regulations?

/And don't give me that video games and Marilyn Manson bullshiat



Allow people with concealed weapon permits to carry in schools like they do everywhere else.
Encourage businesses to stop banning people from carrying firearms. CCW holders are not a problem anywhere.
Accept that in a free society, it may be impossible to stop the terrible acts of a very very very small number of people without needlessly and unfairly infringing on the rights of everyone else.
 
2013-01-20 02:12:51 AM
If I want to ride a bike, I can hop on a bike.

If I want to drive a car, I have to take a written test, and then a test with an instructor.

If I want to drive a truck, there's a bigger test, and a more thorough test with yet another instructor.

If I want to drive an F1 Formula Car, there's a lot more instruction needed, I have to get my racing license, and I can't drive it on the street. It's illegal on normal roads due to it's insane level of performance.

Popping a .22 is a hell of a lot different than firing a round with an AR-15. The .22 in no way shape or form has as much powder behind it, whereas as we found out with the yokels firing with no proper backing, the round from a high powered assault rifle can travel a mile, easily.

Going from a Corolla to a high powered vehicle requires certification and training. Sans that, we get to read about rich idiots plowing their million dollar McLarens into walls.

Someone plonking down cash and buying a serious weapon is not the same as a trained expert. There need to be different levels of cert, period.
 
2013-01-20 02:15:12 AM

Snatch Bandergrip: A sincere question to gun enthusiasts:

What actions do you think that we, as a country, can take to minimize incidents like Newtown and Aurora without enacting stricter gun regulations?

/And don't give me that video games and Marilyn Manson bullshiat


Take sincere measures to aggressively identify dangerous mentally ill persons and simultaneously get them the treatment they need (if any can be made available) to get them healed, while removing their access, including by family with whom they live, to weapons they could use.
The aggressive nature of the identification process must include a means for normal citizens with whom persons interact to report persons who "scare them" or "creep them out" for mental health examination. One report alone shouldn't be enough to trigger a compulsory exam, but a few independent reports over a couple of months should trigger a judge-mandated exam.
And yes, if you're certifiably dangerously insane, you should lose your weapons until you are healed, and the people who choose to let you live with them should either surrender custody of their weapons or actively demonstrate control measures that prevent your access to them.
Owning a tool of death and destruction comes with steep responsibilities. That's why I have to demonstrate competence and carry insurance for my vehicle. If you think the purpose of a gun is anything but to destroy and kill in a very loud manner, you have been horribly miseducated and are quite likely a fool.
 
2013-01-20 02:16:16 AM

Znuh: If I want to drive an F1 Formula Car, there's a lot more instruction needed, I have to get my racing license, and I can't drive it on the street. It's illegal on normal roads due to it's insane level of performance.


It's illegal on public roads because of it's performance?

Someone plonking down cash and buying a serious weapon is not the same as a trained expert. There need to be different levels of cert, period.

What sort of problems are you trying to fix with this 'solution'?
 
2013-01-20 02:21:40 AM

pedrop357: Keizer_Ghidorah: And there you go again with the "take away second Amendment rights", still convinced that you're going to lose ALL of your guns when we're talking about SPECIFIC guns. And then you wonder why people think you're all paranoid.

This is like saying that we're not censoring all speech, just "hate speech". Then we free speech nuts point out hate "hate speech" actually covers a lot of seemingly normal speech when spoken in an angry tone, and has expanded to cover more and more speech over time.

Gee, why we would resist this attempt to ban merely a class of firearms?


Doesn't England ban hate speech, and they haven't had any problems about mistaking what is and isn't hate speech? I know it was some European country.

pedrop357: Snatch Bandergrip: A sincere question to gun enthusiasts:

What actions do you think that we, as a country, can take to minimize incidents like Newtown and Aurora without enacting stricter gun regulations?

/And don't give me that video games and Marilyn Manson bullshiat

Allow people with concealed weapon permits to carry in schools like they do everywhere else.
Encourage businesses to stop banning people from carrying firearms. CCW holders are not a problem anywhere.
Accept that in a free society, it may be impossible to stop the terrible acts of a very very very small number of people without needlessly and unfairly infringing on the rights of everyone else.


So more guns, do nothing else because blood and death is a fair price for guns everywhere.
 
2013-01-20 02:21:49 AM
Point still remains, if you're so scared of the government coming to take your guns away because of background checks and certain types being banned, you have serious emotional problems and a deluded sense of reality.

You really shouldn't be playing with firearms in the first place. No wonder sane people worry about your access to them.
 
2013-01-20 02:22:44 AM

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: i think it's as cogent as most of the nut ramble in here...

and not as nutty as God for sure..

but you aren't too bright so your validation means zip to me...

go polish your guns now...

You can't even use proper grammar and format your sentences in any way that makes sense.

 
2013-01-20 02:24:04 AM

Confabulat: Point still remains, if you're so scared of the government coming to take your guns away because of background checks and certain types being banned, you have serious emotional problems and a deluded sense of reality.

You really shouldn't be playing with firearms in the first place. No wonder sane people worry about your access to them.


Thank you for your opinion.
 
2013-01-20 02:25:44 AM
We also live in a country where lawn darts are illegal. And these things:

<img src="i.dailymail.co.uk ">

But you guys get worked up over background checks to buy things DESIGNED to kill you? What kind of priorities to you have anyway?
 
2013-01-20 02:26:01 AM
Paranoid delusions should disqualify one from firearm ownership.
 
2013-01-20 02:26:40 AM

pedrop357: Znuh: If I want to drive an F1 Formula Car, there's a lot more instruction needed, I have to get my racing license, and I can't drive it on the street. It's illegal on normal roads due to it's insane level of performance.

It's illegal on public roads because of it's performance?

Someone plonking down cash and buying a serious weapon is not the same as a trained expert. There need to be different levels of cert, period.

What sort of problems are you trying to fix with this 'solution'?


If I take an F1 car out on the road, I'll quite likely have my license suspended at best, revoked at normal. I might even end up in jail.

If you're going to fire an insanely powerful weapon, which the AR-15 is, then you have to be certed and pass those certs to first, own and secondly, where you use the weapon has to be restricted. F1 cars are at specified tracks - environments that support the level of performance and, when the shiat hits the fan, that environment exists to minimize damage to both the driver and spectators.
 
2013-01-20 02:27:51 AM

Keizer_Ghidorah: So more guns, do nothing else because blood and death is a fair price for guns everywhere.


Yes, more guns.

We've had a nice crime rate drop with 'more guns'.

More guns goes a very long way towards explaining the lack of mass shootings and other random violence in police stations, gun stores, gun ranges, etc.

It caused a substantial drop in crime in Florida when they introduced shall-issue CCW, etc.
 
2013-01-20 02:27:53 AM

Confabulat: We also live in a country where lawn darts are illegal. And these things:

<img src="[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286] ">

But you guys get worked up over background checks to buy things DESIGNED to kill you? What kind of priorities to you have anyway?


Thank you for your opinion.
 
2013-01-20 02:28:02 AM
I'm sure we will see some black people commit murder during Black History Month too
 
2013-01-20 02:29:10 AM

Znuh: If I take an F1 car out on the road, I'll quite likely have my license suspended at best, revoked at normal. I might even end up in jail.


Really? Why would that happen?

if you register the car and ensure it has proper lighting, you're pretty much good go to go. Some states may require a certain type of tire, but that's about it.
 
2013-01-20 02:31:28 AM

Confabulat: We also live in a country where lawn darts are illegal. And these things:

<img src="[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286] ">

But you guys get worked up over background checks to buy things DESIGNED to kill you? What kind of priorities to you have anyway?


Fallacy. Just because one bad reg exists doesn't justify others. Regulation bootstrapping like this is really desperate.
Why should my kids complain that I beat them? I beat my wife and they don't complain.

FWIW, I bought my first buckyballs when I heard that was happening and wrote my congressmen to complain.
 
2013-01-20 02:32:29 AM
 
2013-01-20 02:34:29 AM

Haliburton Cummings: give up. go green. do yourself in.


farm4.staticflickr.com
 
2013-01-20 02:36:51 AM

pedrop357: Fallacy. Just because one bad reg exists doesn't justify others.


I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying those are ridiculous examples of bad regulations.

But those are toys that just happened to have killed a few people, and now they are banned in the USA. Guns kill tens of thousands of people in this country every year, and gun nuts freak out on conspiracy theories every time they hear about background checks? Why?

It's like you live in an entirely different country than rational people. Why aren't you screaming to God about how they'll pry your lawn darts from your cold dead hands? Why do you think every potential gun restriction is a huge conspiracy to take all your weaponry away and turn the US into Nazi Germany? Yes, I've read your gun rhetoric and that's exactly what the NRA says.
 
2013-01-20 02:36:55 AM

pedrop357: Znuh: If I take an F1 car out on the road, I'll quite likely have my license suspended at best, revoked at normal. I might even end up in jail.

Really? Why would that happen?

if you register the car and ensure it has proper lighting, you're pretty much good go to go. Some states may require a certain type of tire, but that's about it.


Seriously - I've built cars for all my life, and I've put handmade vehicles through certification with several states.

F1 cars cannot be made street legal. Besides the laughable prospect of stapling on bumpers and 'a few lights', any normal person climbing into such a vehicle and hitting the gas would result in a red greasy mess.

If anything, you're making a solid case for my argument. The general public due to lack of education and/or exposure aren't really aware of what they're getting when handed something of a high caliber, no pun intended. We don't start driver training in something Senna would drive because you're no match for the level of skill needed. Putting you into that would result in an instant red-tinted greasy mess.

The same applies to the AR-15, or any other performance machinery. Thinking you can just jump in and drive usually results in hurting yourself and others.
 
2013-01-20 02:37:12 AM

pedrop357: Fallacy.


Isn't it funny how we're suppose to have an "open, honest discussion on guns in this country" yet they cant help but spout fallacies left and right?
 
HBK
2013-01-20 02:37:18 AM

Confabulat: We also live in a country where lawn darts are illegal. And these things:

<img src="[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286] ">

But you guys get worked up over background checks to buy things DESIGNED to kill you? What kind of priorities to you have anyway?


It's stupid that those things are illegal. Why should I support the government making even more things illegal?
 
2013-01-20 02:38:47 AM
OK, who allowed the so-called-progressives into the gun show?
 
2013-01-20 02:40:06 AM

Amos Quito: My god, what next?

Plane crashes at airshows?


I don't agree with you much, but this.
 
2013-01-20 02:40:57 AM

Fubini: As far as I know, there have only ever been two psycho-spree-shootings that have ever involved an "assault weapon," and both of them happened this year.


Here ya go.

assets.motherjones.com

A Guide to Mass Shootings in America
 
2013-01-20 02:44:30 AM

HBK: Confabulat: We also live in a country where lawn darts are illegal. And these things:

<img src="[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286] ">

But you guys get worked up over background checks to buy things DESIGNED to kill you? What kind of priorities to you have anyway?

It's stupid that those things are illegal. Why should I support the government making even more things illegal?


Well that's a very good point. Hmm. Well hell if it's that important to you guys, have your guns, fine with me. Just don't point them in my direction.
 
2013-01-20 02:45:28 AM
Oh, and for the false equivalency crowd with your auto accidents:

These incidents happened at gun shows, not hunting trips or firing ranges.

So it's more like getting run over at a car dealership.
 
2013-01-20 02:45:29 AM
So who wants to go to Lubys?
 
2013-01-20 02:46:39 AM

Hickory-smoked: Frank N Stein: Confabulat: What ARE you getting at? I am happily ignorant of guns for the most part, because my penis is of normal size, but i grew up in a hunting family and I can see the use of a gun for that sort of activity. You could put that in a grey area I think, wiser men that me could sort that out. But there's plenty of other legal weaponry out there that there's no such grey area--they exist only to kill people, and lots of them.

I'm just saying, if those weapons are "extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" than why does your local police force carry them in most of there squad cars?

If I had to guess, I'd say they're for killing people.


Blame these guys.

o4.aolcdn.com

The ineffectiveness of the pistol rounds and shotgun pellets in penetrating the robbers' body armor led to a trend in the United States toward arming selected police patrol officers with semi-automatic 5.56 mm AR-15 type rifles.
 
2013-01-20 02:47:03 AM

Znuh: Seriously - I've built cars for all my life, and I've put handmade vehicles through certification with several states.

F1 cars cannot be made street legal. Besides the laughable prospect of stapling on bumpers and 'a few lights', any normal person climbing into such a vehicle and hitting the gas would result in a red greasy mess.

If anything, you're making a solid case for my argument. The general public due to lack of education and/or exposure aren't really aware of what they're getting when handed something of a high caliber, no pun intended. We don't start driver training in something Senna would drive because you're no match for the level of skill needed. Putting you into that would result in an instant red-tinted greasy mess.

The same applies to the AR-15, or any other performance machinery. Thinking you can just jump in and drive usually results in hurting yourself and others.



The bolded part is what makes me realize that you're a moron.

the general public due to lack of education and/or exposure aren't really aware of what they're getting when handed something of a high caliber, no pun intended
What proof do you have that people are buying more gun than they can handle?

You start by saying that an F1 car cannot be made street legal, THAN divert into what might happen if an uninformed driver stepped into one. What happens when an F1 driver steps into one? Making a car street legal does not require that it be drivable by someone with no idea of its power.

BTW, a person who learns to drive a 93 Corolla can legally drive a Lamborghini , 425HP V8 muscle car, Full size pickup, RIGHT NOW.
 
2013-01-20 02:50:00 AM
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
>ACCIDENT HAPPENSWe always knew he was an irresponsible gun owner. It's a pity he's not like those responsible and safe gun owners.

THIS IS HOW GUN OWNERS ACTUALLY THINK.
 
2013-01-20 02:51:17 AM
fullerton: meanwhile, three cars crashed at the car show. an airplane crashed at an air show and a marathon runner died running a marathon.

When I go fly aerobatics, I don't pretend its making my life safer. You pretend that guns do make your life safer. See the difference?
 
2013-01-20 02:54:54 AM
I didn't think it would be possible for them to find a WORSE use for a closed up Apple Store.

But I forgot about gun nuts.

If only a Catholic Church would move in there, the gates of hell would open up.

/lives down the road from the store
//didn't go to the show
 
2013-01-20 02:55:17 AM

BarkingUnicorn: I guess the pointy-sharpy nuts don't have a strong lobby.


Only a strong aroma.
 
2013-01-20 02:56:47 AM

BronyMedic: So who wants to go to Lubys?


Is that a bar? Sounds good to me
 
2013-01-20 02:57:04 AM

pedrop357: Znuh: Seriously - I've built cars for all my life, and I've put handmade vehicles through certification with several states.

F1 cars cannot be made street legal. Besides the laughable prospect of stapling on bumpers and 'a few lights', any normal person climbing into such a vehicle and hitting the gas would result in a red greasy mess.

If anything, you're making a solid case for my argument. The general public due to lack of education and/or exposure aren't really aware of what they're getting when handed something of a high caliber, no pun intended. We don't start driver training in something Senna would drive because you're no match for the level of skill needed. Putting you into that would result in an instant red-tinted greasy mess.

The same applies to the AR-15, or any other performance machinery. Thinking you can just jump in and drive usually results in hurting yourself and others.


The bolded part is what makes me realize that you're a moron.

the general public due to lack of education and/or exposure aren't really aware of what they're getting when handed something of a high caliber, no pun intended
What proof do you have that people are buying more gun than they can handle?

You start by saying that an F1 car cannot be made street legal, THAN divert into what might happen if an uninformed driver stepped into one. What happens when an F1 driver steps into one? Making a car street legal does not require that it be drivable by someone with no idea of its power.

BTW, a person who learns to drive a 93 Corolla can legally drive a Lamborghini , 425HP V8 muscle car, Full size pickup, RIGHT NOW.


Which, is still less performance than an F1 car. Going from a 425HP muscle car to something with 1500HP is worlds, worlds apart.

So, no. Your analogy fails. And the only reason an F1 Driver can handle something so awesome, is because they've trained for it.

Anyone can pretty much do anything. But doing certain things without learning and schooling yourself result in catastrophe. I'm sure you're great with brain surgery because you've put band-aids on your skin, too.
 
2013-01-20 02:57:21 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
He's a responsible and safe gun owner.
>ACCIDENT HAPPENSWe always knew he was an irresponsible gun owner. It's a pity he's not like those responsible and safe gun owners.

THIS IS HOW GUN OWNERS ACTUALLY THINK.


Everyone is innocent of a crime until they're guilty of one.
 
2013-01-20 03:01:18 AM

Znuh: Which, is still less performance than an F1 car. Going from a 425HP muscle car to something with 1500HP is worlds, worlds apart.

So, no. Your analogy fails. And the only reason an F1 Driver can handle something so awesome, is because they've trained for it.

Anyone can pretty much do anything. But doing certain things without learning and schooling yourself result in catastrophe. I'm sure you're great with brain surgery because you've put band-aids on your skin, too.


You're still not addressing the point you started out with-namely that an F1 can't be made street legal (and that there exists some 'racing license' for driving one). BTW, there are 1000HP street legal cars. They suck for daily driving, but they're street legal.

You talked about people stepping into more gun than they could handle and used F1 cars as a (bad) example, I pointed out that driver licensing does not have a capability requirement now, and you have yet to point out any law or regulation that sets a power/HP/acceleration threshold for drivers licenses.
 
2013-01-20 03:02:08 AM
The incident apparently occurred at a security check point when the owner of a 12-gauge shotgun was asked to remove his gun from its case. Somehow, the gun discharged, shooting two people in the hand and one in the right torso.

Now thats a GD scatter gun!
 
2013-01-20 03:03:28 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: When I go fly aerobatics, I don't pretend its making my life safer. You pretend that guns do make your life safer. See the difference?


Parachutes make sky diving safer, but I'd bet that on a huge nationwide skydiving day involving hundreds of thousands of people skydiving, you might see two or even three accidents on that day, which is more than you typically see on any other day in skydiving.
 
2013-01-20 03:05:03 AM

trappedspirit: The incident apparently occurred at a security check point when the owner of a 12-gauge shotgun was asked to remove his gun from its case. Somehow, the gun discharged, shooting two people in the hand and one in the right torso.

Now thats a GD scatter gun!


He needs to be suspended with pay while the investigation proceeds, and sent to training for a week. if the investigation comes back against him, 1 week suspension ought to do the trick.
 
2013-01-20 03:05:49 AM

rolladuck: Snatch Bandergrip: A sincere question to gun enthusiasts:

What actions do you think that we, as a country, can take to minimize incidents like Newtown and Aurora without enacting stricter gun regulations?

/And don't give me that video games and Marilyn Manson bullshiat

Take sincere measures to aggressively identify dangerous mentally ill persons and simultaneously get them the treatment they need (if any can be made available) to get them healed, while removing their access, including by family with whom they live, to weapons they could use.
The aggressive nature of the identification process must include a means for normal citizens with whom persons interact to report persons who "scare them" or "creep them out" for mental health examination. One report alone shouldn't be enough to trigger a compulsory exam, but a few independent reports over a couple of months should trigger a judge-mandated exam.
And yes, if you're certifiably dangerously insane, you should lose your weapons until you are healed, and the people who choose to let you live with them should either surrender custody of their weapons or actively demonstrate control measures that prevent your access to them.
Owning a tool of death and destruction comes with steep responsibilities. That's why I have to demonstrate competence and carry insurance for my vehicle. If you think the purpose of a gun is anything but to destroy and kill in a very loud manner, you have been horribly miseducated and are quite likely a fool.


Wow. Sounds like you are keen to infringe a load of personal liberties there, just not the "right" to bear arms.

I guess your "right" is more important than anyone else's.
 
2013-01-20 03:07:08 AM

pedrop357: Everyone is innocent of a crime until they're guilty of one.


From the archives:
pedrop357 2009-05-16 04:44:57 PM

What I was getting at is there are a lot more bad cops then fellow cops and their supporters like to admit. Enough of them that perhaps the profession of police officer doesn't deserve this reputation of trustworthiness and integrity that it's been given.

The odds simply don't support the idea that there are only 2 or 3 bad cops in a department of 400 or 4000, and those two or three somehow manage to end up on the same shift responding to the same incident.

...

The million dollar question is why or how should people trust that a police officer they encounter is not possibly abusive, dceptive, or homicidal? Why should police be trusted more then security guards, paramedics, gun store owners, librarians, or any other profession?


Your opinions don't seem very consistent.
 
Displayed 50 of 639 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 closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report