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  
•       •       •

7884 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
 
2013-01-19 08:28:59 PM  
'Merica!
 
2013-01-19 08:30:47 PM  
Freedom costs a buck 'o shot.
 
2013-01-19 08:31:21 PM  
My god, what next?

Plane crashes at airshows?
 
2013-01-19 08:34:59 PM  
No ironic tag?
 
2013-01-19 08:35:18 PM  
Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.
 
2013-01-19 08:35:44 PM  
In before the Outraged RightTM demand that more armed guards are needed at gun shows to prevent future tragedies....
 
2013-01-19 08:41:38 PM  
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.

WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!
 
2013-01-19 08:42:05 PM  
I suppose you libtards would feel better if they'd been stabbed at a knife show!?
 
2013-01-19 08:42:43 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.


To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!
 
2013-01-19 08:44:02 PM  

Sim Tree: 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.

WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!


I think the better question is "Why the hell was your gun on display LOADED?!"
 
2013-01-19 08:44:13 PM  
But do we ever hear of people injured after getting accidentally fuked at a sex show?

'netherlands
 
2013-01-19 08:44:35 PM  
You getting shot at a gun Show is like getting run over by a car at a car show.
 
2013-01-19 08:45:31 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: I suppose you libtards would feel better if they'd been stabbed at a knife show!?


*scratching chin* well... i suppose there's humor in that
 
2013-01-19 08:47:01 PM  
I suspect those people did not appreciate guns quite so much after that.
 
2013-01-19 08:53:10 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-19 08:54:46 PM  
Did the Amusing tag get shot in the ass?
 
2013-01-19 08:57:01 PM  
Waiting for the conspiracy theory people to claim Obama set this up....
 
2013-01-19 09:04:34 PM  

Sim Tree: WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?!


Birdshot.
 
2013-01-19 09:15:20 PM  

Sim Tree: WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!


www.corneredcat.com

You've never seen those ballistics tests with books? That shell was rated a three-human charge, they're lucky it wasn't HE.
 
2013-01-19 09:17:08 PM  

doglover: Sim Tree: WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?!

Birdshot.


Weird thing is, the only time I load birdshot in my .22 is just in case we run in to a snake.
 
2013-01-19 09:18:45 PM  

eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!


The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.
 
2013-01-19 09:22:22 PM  

Codenamechaz: Sim Tree: 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.

WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!

I think the better question is "Why the hell was your gun on display LOADED?!"


Good question. Next question is "How the hell does the buyer not know basic gun safety rules?"
 
2013-01-19 09:23:31 PM  

doyner: eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!

The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.


Please tell me you're joking...*looks it up*...are you kidding me?
 
2013-01-19 09:24:36 PM  

eddievercetti: doyner: eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!

The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.

Please tell me you're joking...*looks it up*...are you kidding me?


I just made that up with a heaping helping of poe slaw.
 
2013-01-19 09:30:23 PM  

doyner: eddievercetti: doyner: eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!

The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.

Please tell me you're joking...*looks it up*...are you kidding me?

I just made that up with a heaping helping of poe slaw.


Dammit, you ruined the joke. We were supposed to let them figure it out.
 
2013-01-19 09:30:45 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: birdshot in my .22


Not in a shotgun?
 
2013-01-19 09:33:29 PM  

eddievercetti: doyner: eddievercetti: doyner: eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!

The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.

Please tell me you're joking...*looks it up*...are you kidding me?

I just made that up with a heaping helping of poe slaw.

Dammit, you ruined the joke. We were supposed to let them figure it out.


There is no ruining the joke, unfortunately, of the upright citizens brigade shooting people at gatherings of "responsible" gun owners.
 
2013-01-19 09:36:28 PM  

doyner: eddievercetti: doyner: eddievercetti: doyner: eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!

The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.

Please tell me you're joking...*looks it up*...are you kidding me?

I just made that up with a heaping helping of poe slaw.

Dammit, you ruined the joke. We were supposed to let them figure it out.

There is no ruining the joke, unfortunately, of the upright citizens brigade shooting people at gatherings of "responsible" gun owners.


Basically, we will all get shot if the derp continues in this gun insanity.
 
2013-01-19 09:44:23 PM  

Speaker2Animals: [i.imgur.com image 850x850]


There're a lot of irresponsible gun owners.
 
2013-01-19 09:50:45 PM  
Nothing makes you appreciate guns more than being shot.
 
2013-01-19 10:09:58 PM  
Martin Luther King Jr. would have been proud.
 
2013-01-19 10:10:56 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: I suppose you libtards would feel better if they'd been stabbed at a knife show!?


Now that's comedy,
 
2013-01-19 10:15:26 PM  

Codenamechaz: Sim Tree: 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.

WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!

I think the better question is "Why the hell was your gun on display LOADED?!"


Reading comprehension people.

A. It wasn't "on display". He was entering the building and passing a safety check point asked to demonstrate the gun was "clear". Clearly he failed the check.
B. Apparently you don't understand how a shotgun works. Hitting 3 people simultaneously is quite easy. Notice how it says two of them in the hand and one in the torso. Depending on the size of the "shot", several dozen bb sized....well bbs.... are ejected at high velocity and scatter out the end. The diameter of the pattern being directly related to the distance from the end of the barrel. If the people injured were 20 or 30 yards away standing in a group it is quite possible to hit several at once.

Oh and clearly he's very stupid of course.
 
2013-01-19 10:22:14 PM  
I believe there is an irony tag...
 
2013-01-19 10:23:29 PM  
Lulz
 
2013-01-19 10:23:58 PM  
Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?
 
2013-01-19 10:24:06 PM  
brandent:
Apparently you don't understand how a shotgun works. Hitting 3 people simultaneously is quite easy. Notice how it says two of them in the hand and one in the torso. Depending on the size of the "shot", several dozen bb sized....well bbs.... are ejected at high velocity and scatter out the end. The diameter of the pattern being directly related to the distance from the end of the barrel. If the people injured were 20 or 30 yards away standing in a group it is quite possible to hit several at once.

You mean a shotgun fires a bunch of bullets at once? Like an assault rifle? How are weapons like that even remotely legal? There's no way that's safe or legitimate for hunting or self defense. You could hit things you aren't even aiming at.
 
2013-01-19 10:27:32 PM  
It's assholes like this that make the two or three dozen responsible gun owners in this country look bad.
 
2013-01-19 10:27:54 PM  
I haven't been this happy since those religious fools got their "10 Commandments" monument okayed by the courts after three years and only then discovered it was misspelled.

Go, gun nuts! Prove to everyone you're a bunch of freaking idiots who shouldn't be trusted with a burned-out match!
 
2013-01-19 10:28:01 PM  
Make that 5 dumbasses shot.

http://www.wral.com/5-hurt-in-shootings-at-gun-shows-in-ohio-ind-nc/1 2 001560/
 
2013-01-19 10:29:00 PM  

Speaker2Animals: [i.imgur.com image 850x850]


UH....those would be the irresponsible gun owners....so your argument is invalid.
 
2013-01-19 10:29:24 PM  

Speaker2Animals: [i.imgur.com image 850x850]


overused meme is overused.
 
2013-01-19 10:30:01 PM  
Somehow the gun discharged.
Somehow the gun discharged.
SOMEHOW the gun discharged.


....and that's the problem right there. Somehow THIS IDIOT OVER HERE BROUGHT A LOADED, CHAMBERED WEAPON, WITH THE SAFETY OFF, and then PULLED THE TRIGGER while picking it up.

Put him in jail for a lengthy time... accidental shootings should be treated the same as a DUI wreck resulting in attempted manslaughter charges or worse.

He had to make so many inexcusable errors for this to happen that I can think of no other recourse other than to make examples out of people.

/and I'm a gun nut
 
2013-01-19 10:30:32 PM  
If only everyone at the gun show was armed, this wouldn't happen, amirite?

/Did RTFA
 
2013-01-19 10:31:59 PM  
This is a country where large buckets come with a warning that you shouldn't fill them with water and leave them around small children, because a child could fall in and drown.

If your average American can't be trusted with a plastic bucket, it shouldn't be a surprise when a hand or two is blown off at a gun show.
 
2013-01-19 10:32:03 PM  

Sim Tree: 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.

WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!


Shotguns fire multiple small projectiles over a wide area. More at 10.


/central time
 
2013-01-19 10:34:23 PM  
I hope the people who were shot appreciated it.
 
2013-01-19 10:34:25 PM  

No Such Agency: brandent:
Apparently you don't understand how a shotgun works. Hitting 3 people simultaneously is quite easy. Notice how it says two of them in the hand and one in the torso. Depending on the size of the "shot", several dozen bb sized....well bbs.... are ejected at high velocity and scatter out the end. The diameter of the pattern being directly related to the distance from the end of the barrel. If the people injured were 20 or 30 yards away standing in a group it is quite possible to hit several at once.

You mean a shotgun fires a bunch of bullets at once? Like an assault rifle? How are weapons like that even remotely legal? There's no way that's safe or legitimate for hunting or self defense. You could hit things you aren't even aiming at.


You don't know much about guns or hunting, do you. Maybe do a little studying on the internet.
 
2013-01-19 10:35:48 PM  
way to take your thread title directly from Gawker.
 
2013-01-19 10:35:48 PM  
lol - morons
 
2013-01-19 10:35:56 PM  
What's really surprising is nobody returned fire.
 
2013-01-19 10:35:56 PM  
I've never seen a group of people that so actively sabotage their own cause like the gun nuts do.
 
2013-01-19 10:36:00 PM  

whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?


If you're too slow to chase stuff, you have to shoot it to slow it down.
 
2013-01-19 10:36:21 PM  
This is totally proof God exists.......and she has a hell of a sense of humor!
 
2013-01-19 10:36:23 PM  
i2.ytimg.com

"It's not that bad, people get shot all the time."
 
2013-01-19 10:36:43 PM  
Thanks responsible gun owners. I feel safer already.
 
2013-01-19 10:38:17 PM  
i.imgur.com

Gunmerica is gunparalleled in it's gunintelligence.

GUNTASTIC!
 
2013-01-19 10:38:51 PM  

Huntceet: No Such Agency: brandent:
Apparently you don't understand how a shotgun works. Hitting 3 people simultaneously is quite easy. Notice how it says two of them in the hand and one in the torso. Depending on the size of the "shot", several dozen bb sized....well bbs.... are ejected at high velocity and scatter out the end. The diameter of the pattern being directly related to the distance from the end of the barrel. If the people injured were 20 or 30 yards away standing in a group it is quite possible to hit several at once.

You mean a shotgun fires a bunch of bullets at once? Like an assault rifle? How are weapons like that even remotely legal? There's no way that's safe or legitimate for hunting or self defense. You could hit things you aren't even aiming at.

You don't know much about guns or hunting, do you. Maybe do a little studying on the internet.


Holy shiat. THIS is why no one can take gun activists seriously. Even when it's your own side you can't recognize sarcasm.
 
2013-01-19 10:39:48 PM  

Alonjar: Somehow the gun discharged.
Somehow the gun discharged.
SOMEHOW the gun discharged.


....and that's the problem right there. Somehow THIS IDIOT OVER HERE BROUGHT A LOADED, CHAMBERED WEAPON, WITH THE SAFETY OFF, and then PULLED THE TRIGGER while picking it up.

Put him in jail for a lengthy time... accidental shootings should be treated the same as a DUI wreck resulting in attempted manslaughter charges or worse.

He had to make so many inexcusable errors for this to happen that I can think of no other recourse other than to make examples out of people.

/and I'm a gun nut


THIS! I like shooting, and DAMMIT why didn't CHeney have his permit revoked???

I mean, I know why, but still...
 
2013-01-19 10:40:54 PM  

FilmKitty: What's really surprising is nobody returned fire.


Actually, that is surprising. And scary...
 
2013-01-19 10:43:32 PM  
Three more responsible gun owners heard from!

On Gun Appreciation Day, no less!
 
2013-01-19 10:43:56 PM  

Tarl3k: I believe there is an irony tag...


But this is not ironic. There are a LOT of idiots out there with firearms. This is to be expected. Obvious tag couldn't be more appropriate.
 
2013-01-19 10:44:11 PM  

Allen. The end.: FilmKitty: What's really surprising is nobody returned fire.

Actually, that is surprising. And scary...


Fortunately, the morons were the minority.
 
2013-01-19 10:44:11 PM  

Allen. The end.: FilmKitty: What's really surprising is nobody returned fire.

Actually, that is surprising. And scary...


It's pretty hard to return fire when you're bravely waddling for the exit as fast as your legs can carry you while streams of panicked urine are dripping down your legs.
 
2013-01-19 10:44:33 PM  
 
2013-01-19 10:45:06 PM  
"somehow"
 
2013-01-19 10:45:19 PM  
We're up to what... 5 separate gun shows with people shot?
 
2013-01-19 10:45:30 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: I suppose you libtards would feel better if they'd been stabbed at a knife show!?


How does one accidentally stab 3 people?
 
2013-01-19 10:46:34 PM  
There really aren't enough faces and palms to adequately show my appall...
 
2013-01-19 10:46:43 PM  
My favorite is: "The clip is out so there never could still be a bullet in the chamber" BLAM...ricochet... Durrrrr.
then: "I gots to load my weapon as i have just left the building"... BLAM....in the hand

/just about as fun as watching a gun safety instructor pull out the clip and put the gun to his head and watching the brains fall out the other side.
 
2013-01-19 10:46:53 PM  

doyner: eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!

The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.


Thanks for clearing that up.  I've never been to a gun show, but in every photo or video of one that I've seen I could not recall any zip-ties.

I've seen zip-ties required to keep swords and axes in their scabbards at Renaissance Festivals.  I  guess the pointy-sharpy nuts don't have a strong lobby.
 
2013-01-19 10:46:53 PM  

Alonjar: Somehow the gun discharged.
Somehow the gun discharged.
SOMEHOW the gun discharged.


....and that's the problem right there. Somehow THIS IDIOT OVER HERE BROUGHT A LOADED, CHAMBERED WEAPON, WITH THE SAFETY OFF, and then PULLED THE TRIGGER while picking it up.

Put him in jail for a lengthy time... accidental shootings should be treated the same as a DUI wreck resulting in attempted manslaughter charges or worse.

He had to make so many inexcusable errors for this to happen that I can think of no other recourse other than to make examples out of people.

/and I'm a gun nut


^^^What he said. People like this aren't helping at all. farking idiots.
Loaded or not, get your booger hook off the bang switch!
 
2013-01-19 10:46:55 PM  

Xetal: We're up to what... 5 separate gun shows with people shot?


We like to call it "Interactive Gun Shows".
 
2013-01-19 10:46:55 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.


Neither shooting happened inside the respective show. One was in the parking lot, one was at the checkpoint where they would zip-tie the gun.
 
2013-01-19 10:46:55 PM  
But more guns is still the solution.
 
2013-01-19 10:47:08 PM  
Nothing makes you appreciate guns more than shooting people with them.

/yeah, the other guy did better with the "I hope the people who got shot appreciated it"
 
2013-01-19 10:47:29 PM  
I wonder how many car accidents happen on race day.
 
2013-01-19 10:48:57 PM  
I am outraged that President Obama hasn't signed an executive order repealing the Second Amendment yet. It's like he doesn't care about this country.
 
2013-01-19 10:49:03 PM  

Joe Peanut: Lionel Mandrake: I suppose you libtards would feel better if they'd been stabbed at a knife show!?

How does one accidentally stab 3 people?


You obviously don't watch Benny Hill.

OK, ladders not swords, same idea though.
 
2013-01-19 10:51:27 PM  
Statistically, 500 people are killed every year from accidental gun discharges. That means on average 1-2 deaths per day, and undoubtedly more injuries. Lots of people die and get injured every day for more stupid reasons than accidental discharge.

This is only "news" or "ironic" if you're totally uninformed.
 
2013-01-19 10:51:27 PM  
meanwhile, three cars crashed at the car show. an airplane crashed at an air show and a marathon runner died running a marathon.
 
2013-01-19 10:52:19 PM  
lh3.googleusercontent.com
 
2013-01-19 10:52:31 PM  

Alonjar: I wonder how many car accidents happen on race day.


Depends, is Danica driving?
 
2013-01-19 10:53:33 PM  

boobsrgood: But more guns is still the solution.


If only someone would have accidentally shot those who accidentally shot someone before they could accidentally shoot whom they shot.
 
2013-01-19 10:54:06 PM  
Fortunately, we only lost 219 people today as the price we pay for the freedom to drink alcohol.

eagerly awaiting the typical "THAT'S DIFFERENT!" response from the alcoholics.
 
2013-01-19 10:54:43 PM  

eddievercetti: No ironic tag?


Wouldn't that be if no one got shot?
 
2013-01-19 10:55:04 PM  
Still less killings than at a Chicago basketball game.
 
2013-01-19 10:55:09 PM  

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: Joe Peanut: Lionel Mandrake: I suppose you libtards would feel better if they'd been stabbed at a knife show!?

How does one accidentally stab 3 people?

You obviously don't watch Benny Hill.

OK, ladders not swords, same idea though.


Benny Hill COULD stab someone with a ladder, though, if it was sharp.
 
2013-01-19 10:55:20 PM  
the gun-control movement is a bunch of old, out-of-touch white people, clinging to the politics of the last century.
 
2013-01-19 10:55:32 PM  
Epic gun thread.
www.troll.me
 
2013-01-19 10:55:43 PM  

fullerton: meanwhile, three cars crashed at the car show. an airplane crashed at an air show and a marathon runner died running a marathon.


Did this imaginary marathon runner injure three other people on his way out?
 
2013-01-19 10:56:20 PM  
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.

Gee, I don't know how that could've happened, what with me being a responsible gun owner who UNLOADS THE farkING GUN BEFORE I PUT IT INTO THE CASE and all.
 
2013-01-19 10:56:53 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fortunately, we only lost 219 people today as the price we pay for the freedom to drink alcohol.

eagerly awaiting the typical "THAT'S DIFFERENT!" response from the alcoholics.



HEY, WHOA.
lolbamas.com
 
2013-01-19 10:57:45 PM  

boobsrgood: eddievercetti: No ironic tag?

Wouldn't that be if no one got shot?


It would be like if you go to a car show and suddenly get run over by Jay Leno, Danica Patrick or James May.
 
2013-01-19 10:57:48 PM  

Alonjar: Somehow the gun discharged.
Somehow the gun discharged.
SOMEHOW the gun discharged.


....and that's the problem right there. Somehow THIS IDIOT OVER HERE BROUGHT A LOADED, CHAMBERED WEAPON, WITH THE SAFETY OFF, and then PULLED THE TRIGGER while picking it up.

Put him in jail for a lengthy time... accidental shootings should be treated the same as a DUI wreck resulting in attempted manslaughter charges or worse.

He had to make so many inexcusable errors for this to happen that I can think of no other recourse other than to make examples out of people.

/and I'm a gun nut


Second.
 
2013-01-19 10:57:50 PM  
Seriously. It's not hard to keep a weapon unloaded. And you should be treating EVERY weapon like it's loaded anyhow. What in the chocolate covered f*ck are these idiots thinking?
 
2013-01-19 10:57:52 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fortunately, we only lost 219 people today as the price we pay for the freedom to drink alcohol.

eagerly awaiting the typical "THAT'S DIFFERENT!" response from the alcoholics.


And on average lose around ninety a day to automobile mishaps. Ban cars; everybody can be a douchebag cyclist like I am.

You're welcome!
 
2013-01-19 10:58:45 PM  

fullerton: meanwhile, three cars crashed at the car show. an airplane crashed at an air show and a marathon runner died running a marathon.


The car drivers knew the risk, are wearing safety gear, and didn't crash into the spectators. The marathon runner didn't injure any innocent bystanders and died doing something that is of great health benefit for the vast majority of people involved in the sport. And the ones at the air show are the exact same idiots who go to gun shows.
 
2013-01-19 10:59:31 PM  

vygramul: Speaker2Animals: [i.imgur.com image 850x850]

There're a lot of irresponsible gun owners.


There are even more now. People who previously had little interest in shooting and/or firearms are running out to buy guns, thinking that this might be their last opportunity to do so before they are banned. (I am not saying that they will be banned.) I heard some downright scary conversations at the gun range last weekend. And it wasn't a "gun nut" that made it scary. It was someone who had absolutely no knowledge of guns, shooting, gun safety, etc. He even mentioned that guns scared him, but he wanted one "for defense." Salesman suggested that he rent a gun and take a 1-hour class offered by the range before buying. I thought that was logical.

My theory is that if they do ban high-capacity magazines and scary guns the next problem will be guns that are too small and too easy to conceal. So we'll see mass shootings with the assault rifles that are already out there, and more accidental shootings by people with pocket-guns and small handguns.
 
2013-01-19 10:59:38 PM  

Huntceet: No Such Agency: brandent:
Apparently you don't understand how a shotgun works. Hitting 3 people simultaneously is quite easy. Notice how it says two of them in the hand and one in the torso. Depending on the size of the "shot", several dozen bb sized....well bbs.... are ejected at high velocity and scatter out the end. The diameter of the pattern being directly related to the distance from the end of the barrel. If the people injured were 20 or 30 yards away standing in a group it is quite possible to hit several at once.

You mean a shotgun fires a bunch of bullets at once? Like an assault rifle? How are weapons like that even remotely legal? There's no way that's safe or legitimate for hunting or self defense. You could hit things you aren't even aiming at.

You don't know much about guns or hunting, do you. Maybe do a little studying on the internet.


It's called sarcasm. You can find the defenition on the internet.
 
2013-01-19 10:59:45 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.


this is how fascism begins ... with seemingly innocent measures like mandatory zip-ties.

don't forget: those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither.
 
2013-01-19 11:01:38 PM  

vabeard: Still less fewer killings than at a Chicago basketball game.

/fixed
 
2013-01-19 11:01:44 PM  
Was anybody shot in the shoulder?
 
2013-01-19 11:02:29 PM  
Guns don't kill people. If you want to kill someone you will find a way.

That's why the US Marines gave up firearms years ago.
 
2013-01-19 11:02:55 PM  
Because these people were only hurt, I find this story funny.
However, if they had been killed, I would have found it hilarious.
 
2013-01-19 11:03:02 PM  

scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.


This ain't even close to being an epic thread.
 
2013-01-19 11:03:10 PM  

spacelord321: Huntceet: No Such Agency: brandent:
Apparently you don't understand how a shotgun works. Hitting 3 people simultaneously is quite easy. Notice how it says two of them in the hand and one in the torso. Depending on the size of the "shot", several dozen bb sized....well bbs.... are ejected at high velocity and scatter out the end. The diameter of the pattern being directly related to the distance from the end of the barrel. If the people injured were 20 or 30 yards away standing in a group it is quite possible to hit several at once.

You mean a shotgun fires a bunch of bullets at once? Like an assault rifle? How are weapons like that even remotely legal? There's no way that's safe or legitimate for hunting or self defense. You could hit things you aren't even aiming at.

You don't know much about guns or hunting, do you. Maybe do a little studying on the internet.

It's called sarcasm. You can find the defenition on the internet.


Probably the correct spelling of definition as well.
 
2013-01-19 11:04:10 PM  

jaytkay: Guns don't kill people. If you want to kill someone you will find a way.

That's why the US Marines gave up firearms years ago.


Not everyone can afford remote-piloted drones, Richie McRicherson.
 
2013-01-19 11:04:55 PM  
You have a 0.0036% chance of being killed by a firearm, not counting intentional suicide.

SHUT. DOWN. EVERYTHING.
 
2013-01-19 11:05:34 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fortunately, we only lost 219 people today as the price we pay for the freedom to drink alcohol.

eagerly awaiting the typical "THAT'S DIFFERENT!" response from the alcoholics.


I think the difference being that there isn't a convention where people get together and show each other how awesome and knowledgeable they are about booze. And if they do it's called a kegger and when people get alcohol poisoning it's considered funny as the gun equivalent it is here.
 
2013-01-19 11:05:34 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: doyner: eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!

The NRA successfully lobbied Congress to remove the zip-tie restriction on our freedoms in 2003.

Thanks for clearing that up.  I've never been to a gun show, but in every photo or video of one that I've seen I could not recall any zip-ties.

I've seen zip-ties required to keep swords and axes in their scabbards at Renaissance Festivals.  I  guess the pointy-sharpy nuts don't have a strong lobby.


Ren Faire folks tend to be saner.
 
2013-01-19 11:05:42 PM  

whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?


Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!
 
2013-01-19 11:06:04 PM  

NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.

This ain't even close to being an epic thread.


I don't think so, either. 3 or 4 gun threads a day have worn me out.
 
2013-01-19 11:06:32 PM  

hubiestubert: Seriously. It's not hard to keep a weapon unloaded. And you should be treating EVERY weapon like it's loaded anyhow. What in the chocolate covered f*ck are these idiots thinking?


First you assume that they're thinking. This is a mistake.
 
2013-01-19 11:07:46 PM  
Next week: Body Armor Appreciation Day
 
2013-01-19 11:08:56 PM  

LowbrowDeluxe: Huntceet: No Such Agency: brandent:
Apparently you don't understand how a shotgun works. Hitting 3 people simultaneously is quite easy. Notice how it says two of them in the hand and one in the torso. Depending on the size of the "shot", several dozen bb sized....well bbs.... are ejected at high velocity and scatter out the end. The diameter of the pattern being directly related to the distance from the end of the barrel. If the people injured were 20 or 30 yards away standing in a group it is quite possible to hit several at once.

You mean a shotgun fires a bunch of bullets at once? Like an assault rifle? How are weapons like that even remotely legal? There's no way that's safe or legitimate for hunting or self defense. You could hit things you aren't even aiming at.

You don't know much about guns or hunting, do you. Maybe do a little studying on the internet.

Holy shiat. THIS is why no one can take gun activists seriously. Even when it's your own side you can't recognize sarcasm.


Poe's law. Most of the anti-gun people really do know fark-all about guns, and detecting the sarcasm from the serious is hard.
 
2013-01-19 11:08:58 PM  
The gun is always loaded
The gun is always loaded.
The gun is always loaded.

What part of that did these dumbasses not understand?
 
2013-01-19 11:08:59 PM  
 
2013-01-19 11:09:37 PM  

simplicimus: NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.

This ain't even close to being an epic thread.

I don't think so, either. 3 or 4 gun threads a day have worn me out.


And they all tend to digress into the same old thread.
 
2013-01-19 11:10:19 PM  
Good.
 
2013-01-19 11:10:25 PM  

Fubini: Statistically, 500 people are killed every year from accidental gun discharges. That means on average 1-2 deaths per day, and undoubtedly more injuries. Lots of people die and get injured every day for more stupid reasons than accidental discharge.

This is only "news" or "ironic" if you're totally uninformed.


Or watching folks tripping over themselves to wrap themselves in the flag to show off their "patriotic" love of firearms while simultaneously reinforcing the perception that perhaps stronger licensing might be in order on a day to celebrate their weapons and their love of them...

Or did you just miss that?

I own a few firearms. A couple of pistols, a couple of shotguns, a few rifles, and even had a concealed carry for a few years, because at the time I was making night deposits in Boston, and that was back when the Combat Zone was still kind of dangerous. I am a strong proponent for the Second Amendment, and the First too. The wroth that folks are in about the possibility of background checks and limitations might be a bit better received as patriotic fervor, if they might refrain from illustrating, in such a public fashion, that the gun owning community needs to be more responsible.

Yes, accidents occur every day. That's still too many, but maybe if folks didn't illustrate why gun shows are hotbeds of recklessness, it might make a stronger case that the gun owning community IS responsible. These yahoos are only making it harder for folks who DO take gun safety seriously, and do you really want to defend idiocy of this level? Really? At which point does loading a weapon, in public, and handling it in an unsafe manner become acceptable and commonplace?

Don't forget to show your work.
 
2013-01-19 11:10:38 PM  

Gyrfalcon: hubiestubert: Seriously. It's not hard to keep a weapon unloaded. And you should be treating EVERY weapon like it's loaded anyhow. What in the chocolate covered f*ck are these idiots thinking?

First you assume that they're thinking. This is a mistake.


It's like a watershed moment in the argument for mandatory gun licensing. We require folks to demonstrate basic vehicular safety before getting a vehicle license - it's time gun owners demonstrated basic firearm safety before being given a gun license. We're already equipped to give eye exams for vehicle licenses, so we're covered there, too.

Still means your grandmother isn't getting a Mossberg. Or a Mustang.
 
2013-01-19 11:10:52 PM  

NightOwl2255: simplicimus: NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.

This ain't even close to being an epic thread.

I don't think so, either. 3 or 4 gun threads a day have worn me out.

And they all tend to digress into the same old thread.


If those guys were in a Militia it never woulda happened!
 
2013-01-19 11:11:11 PM  

hundreddollarman: The gun is always loaded
The gun is always loaded.
The gun is always loaded.

What part of that did these dumbasses not understand?


That the gun might be loaded?
 
2013-01-19 11:12:48 PM  
gunappreciationday-psyclone.netdna-ssl.com

Everybody get that message?
 
2013-01-19 11:13:28 PM  

Alonjar: You have a 0.0036% chance of being killed by a firearm, not counting intentional suicide.

SHUT. DOWN. EVERYTHING.


And it's far lower than that if you're not a criminal.
 
2013-01-19 11:13:40 PM  
Uh, Were there really 8 people shot at 5 shows or what that just an exaggeration?
 
2013-01-19 11:13:57 PM  

brewswane: the gun-control movement is a bunch of old, out-of-touch white people, clinging to the politics of the last century.


That would be the 20th century, where the politics of this nation stopped the rise of Fascists, Nazis, Communists and Socialists in the various global and regional wars? True, those ideals may not have as many supporters today.
 
2013-01-19 11:14:44 PM  
Another example of why we need to get God back in our gun shows.
 
2013-01-19 11:15:13 PM  

Farker Soze: NightOwl2255: simplicimus: NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.

This ain't even close to being an epic thread.

I don't think so, either. 3 or 4 gun threads a day have worn me out.

And they all tend to digress into the same old thread.

If those guys were in a Militia it never woulda happened!


If the other people at the show were armed...
 
2013-01-19 11:16:23 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Uh, Were there really 8 people shot at 5 shows or what that just an exaggeration?


I don't know about nationwide, but 3 people were struck with bird shot pellets when a shotgun was negligently discharged at the Raleigh NC show.
 
2013-01-19 11:16:25 PM  

Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!



I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.
 
2013-01-19 11:16:51 PM  

Sim Tree: 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.

WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!


It's a shotgun. It is usually loaded with a shell, which contains a number of metal pellets called the "shot." They emerge from the barrel and spread out in a spray.
 
2013-01-19 11:18:03 PM  
So many republicans have committed suicide this week. If only there were some holiday to help them appreciate the dignity and beauty of human life.
 
2013-01-19 11:18:15 PM  

fullerton: meanwhile, three cars crashed at the car show. an airplane crashed at an air show and a marathon runner died running a marathon.


DMV motto: Driving is a priviledge, not a right.
There's a government organization that monitors every single flying aircraft.
Runners must be screened for health before being admitted into a marathon.
Oh, and all three require training and insurance.

If you want the same for firearms ownership, I agree.
 
2013-01-19 11:18:24 PM  
See, this is what happens when you remove God from gun shows.
 
2013-01-19 11:18:48 PM  

Alonjar: You have a 0.0036% chance of being killed by a firearm, not counting intentional suicide.

SHUT. DOWN. EVERYTHING.


What are the odds of being killed in a terrorist attack in America?

Shut. Down. Everything.
 
2013-01-19 11:19:02 PM  
Those shootings weren't accidental. They were due to negligence.

Reckless endangerment... and swing by later to pick up the rest of their weapons. I'm sick of farkwits like these and their 'accidents.'
 
2013-01-19 11:20:14 PM  
In before... well, I guess not. All the bases are covered.
 
2013-01-19 11:20:22 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Uh, Were there really 8 people shot at 5 shows or what that just an exaggeration?


I heard five people at three gun shows.
 
2013-01-19 11:20:29 PM  

GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!


I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.


And then this guy showed up...
 
2013-01-19 11:20:47 PM  

Codenamechaz: I think the better question is "Why the hell was your gun on display LOADED?!"


A gun is always LOADED.
 
2013-01-19 11:21:11 PM  

hundreddollarman: The gun is always loaded
The gun is always loaded.
The gun is always loaded.

What part of that did these dumbasses not understand?


The part about triggers and fingers.
 
2013-01-19 11:21:22 PM  

hubiestubert: Yes, accidents occur every day. That's still too many, but maybe if folks didn't illustrate why gun shows are hotbeds of recklessness, it might make a stronger case that the gun owning community IS responsible. These yahoos are only making it harder for folks who DO take gun safety seriously, and do you really want to defend idiocy of this level? Really? At which point does loading a weapon, in public, and handling it in an unsafe manner become acceptable and commonplace?

Don't forget to show your work.


My whole point is that this attitude reflects a total lack of thought. TFA says something like 4-5 people injured by guns today. That's pretty much exactly in line with what you'd expect, statistically. They're not "hotbeds or recklessness," it's business as usual. Whether you think five injuries and two deaths a day is too many is a totally separate question, but don't wave them around like suddenly the five injuries and two deaths that happened on "Gun Appreciation Day" somehow mean more than the five injuries and two deaths that happen any other day of the year.

Again, bear the absolute numbers in mind (and I apologize but these are probably not totally accurate, I'm not going to go look them up again just now). There are something like 310 million guns in the US, and something like 80 million gun owners. Out of those 80 million gun owners, we know that probably something like 3-5 managed to do something stupid enough to hurt another human being. And that's it. Those are the numbers when placed in the proper context. Whether you think that shows that gun owners are irresponsible and untrustworthy is up to you. But the fact that a few gun owners hurt themselves and others today shouldn't be the point of discussion.
 
2013-01-19 11:23:32 PM  
Thought of this....
Link
'Troopers: Gun Privileges'
 
2013-01-19 11:23:37 PM  
This is not helping their cause.
 
2013-01-19 11:25:06 PM  

elchip: Alonjar: You have a 0.0036% chance of being killed by a firearm, not counting intentional suicide.

SHUT. DOWN. EVERYTHING.

What are the odds of being killed in a terrorist attack in America?

Shut. Down. Everything.


That's the funny thing. We spent billions on the TSA, who scrutinizes every passenger, and terrorists who wind up getting on planes anyway are taken down by.. regular people! We could have just saved that 60 billion, because ultimately, you can't trust your protection to anyone but yourself. People need to learn that, before life teaches them.
Eagerly awaiting the "Sure it didn't work at all, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still try the same thing!".
 
2013-01-19 11:26:44 PM  

hundreddollarman: The gun is always loaded
The gun is always loaded.
The gun is always loaded.

What part of that did these dumbasses not understand?


"Stop trying to steal their guns you goddamn liberal communist fascist gun-hating hippie NObama blowing traitor! 'MURKA! F*CK YEA!"

That part.
 
2013-01-19 11:27:10 PM  

NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.

This ain't even close to being an epic thread.


I'm not going to argue unless you've paid.
t.fod4.com
 
2013-01-19 11:27:27 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: elchip: Alonjar: You have a 0.0036% chance of being killed by a firearm, not counting intentional suicide.

SHUT. DOWN. EVERYTHING.

What are the odds of being killed in a terrorist attack in America?

Shut. Down. Everything.

That's the funny thing. We spent billions on the TSA, who scrutinizes every passenger, and terrorists who wind up getting on planes anyway are taken down by.. regular people! We could have just saved that 60 billion, because ultimately, you can't trust your protection to anyone but yourself. People need to learn that, before life teaches them.
Eagerly awaiting the "Sure it didn't work at all, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still try the same thing!".


Kill. Everything. Now.
 
2013-01-19 11:27:34 PM  

december: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

this is how fascism begins ... with seemingly innocent measures like mandatory zip-ties.

don't forget: those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither.



img151.imageshack.us
 
2013-01-19 11:28:20 PM  

GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!


I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.


100/100

image.blingee.com
 
2013-01-19 11:28:29 PM  

Kome: hundreddollarman: The gun is always loaded
The gun is always loaded.
The gun is always loaded.

What part of that did these dumbasses not understand?

"Stop trying to steal their guns you goddamn liberal communist fascist gun-hating hippie NObama blowing traitor! 'MURKA! F*CK YEA!"

That part.


Nah, I think they just thought the gun was unloaded.
 
2013-01-19 11:28:53 PM  

GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.


I'm the same as you. I figured the Republicans would be in office whenever things got that bad.
 
2013-01-19 11:29:40 PM  

Fubini: But the fact that a few gun owners hurt themselves and others today shouldn't be the point of discussion.


You're neglecting the fact these people were turning out for Gun Appreciation Day to send a message to the rest of the country about how they feel about limiting the rights of responsible gun owners.

Then shooting themselves and each other.
 
2013-01-19 11:29:57 PM  
Believe it or not this is actually normal, it's just that we don't usually hear about it. Guns are the current "in" thing for news to report on.
 
2013-01-19 11:29:59 PM  
Exxon Sploog is here. This should get good now.
 
2013-01-19 11:30:38 PM  

Fubini: hubiestubert: Yes, accidents occur every day. That's still too many, but maybe if folks didn't illustrate why gun shows are hotbeds of recklessness, it might make a stronger case that the gun owning community IS responsible. These yahoos are only making it harder for folks who DO take gun safety seriously, and do you really want to defend idiocy of this level? Really? At which point does loading a weapon, in public, and handling it in an unsafe manner become acceptable and commonplace?

Don't forget to show your work.

My whole point is that this attitude reflects a total lack of thought. TFA says something like 4-5 people injured by guns today. That's pretty much exactly in line with what you'd expect, statistically. They're not "hotbeds or recklessness," it's business as usual. Whether you think five injuries and two deaths a day is too many is a totally separate question, but don't wave them around like suddenly the five injuries and two deaths that happened on "Gun Appreciation Day" somehow mean more than the five injuries and two deaths that happen any other day of the year.

Again, bear the absolute numbers in mind (and I apologize but these are probably not totally accurate, I'm not going to go look them up again just now). There are something like 310 million guns in the US, and something like 80 million gun owners. Out of those 80 million gun owners, we know that probably something like 3-5 managed to do something stupid enough to hurt another human being. And that's it. Those are the numbers when placed in the proper context. Whether you think that shows that gun owners are irresponsible and untrustworthy is up to you. But the fact that a few gun owners hurt themselves and others today shouldn't be the point of discussion.


The difficulty is the perception of gun shows being exactly that. And lo, the perception is now only intensified. This is the problem.

Most gun owners are fairly responsible. The problem is, that there are enough yahoos and idiots who KEEP doing idiotic things, and NOT being castigated for it, by the community. Instead, we have folks who leap to the defense. Or to minimize their idiocy, which is the tack you're taking.

It's not enough. It makes the gun owning community look bad, and it only reinforces perceptions of recklessness, and to be fair, in these cases, outright negligence. On a day when folks have been encouraged to go out an purchase arms, it is even more worse, because guess what? It only reinforces the perception that folks are reckless and careless. On a day when they were supposed to be doing EXACTLY the opposite. Minimizing that doesn't make it any better. The responsible community comes down on folks who endanger others, not make excuses for them.
 
2013-01-19 11:31:01 PM  
3 idiots do something stupid with guns, therefore we should take away everyones right to own firearms?

Shiat, with that logic, we a should immediately take away everyone's right to vote after electing farkwads that spend the country into a $16 trillion dollar debt, happily guts our military into damn near laughing stock status, and pretty much spits on the constitution daily.

Oh wait, I forgot... It's OK, since it's YOUR guys doing it. And "but but but but Bush".
 
2013-01-19 11:31:32 PM  

scottapeshot: NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.

This ain't even close to being an epic thread.

I'm not going to argue unless you've paid.


I've damn well paid. And I don't think I like you tone, sir. Could you please direct me to the complaint department.
 
2013-01-19 11:31:50 PM  

hubiestubert: Seriously. It's not hard to keep a weapon unloaded. And you should be treating EVERY weapon like it's loaded anyhow. What in the chocolate covered f*ck are these idiots thinking?


I have no idea why, but I'm sitting here laughing hysterically at "what in the chocolate covered f*ck".
 
2013-01-19 11:32:13 PM  
MORE GUNS! WE NEED MORE GUNS!
 
2013-01-19 11:32:39 PM  

Farker Soze: Exxon Sploog is here. This should get good now.


LOL
 
2013-01-19 11:33:16 PM  
If only people at the gun show had been armed.
 
2013-01-19 11:33:24 PM  

NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: NightOwl2255: scottapeshot: Epic gun thread.

This ain't even close to being an epic thread.

I'm not going to argue unless you've paid.

I've damn well paid. And I don't think I like you tone, sir. Could you please direct me to the complaint department.


c'mon, everyone likes you tone...
 
2013-01-19 11:33:25 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Fubini: But the fact that a few gun owners hurt themselves and others today shouldn't be the point of discussion.

You're neglecting the fact these people were turning out for Gun Appreciation Day to send a message to the rest of the country about how they feel about limiting the rights of responsible gun owners.


Unlikely. Most likely they were there to buy and sell overpriced shiat.
 
2013-01-19 11:33:50 PM  

Alonjar: Somehow the gun discharged.
Somehow the gun discharged.
SOMEHOW the gun discharged.


....and that's the problem right there. Somehow THIS IDIOT OVER HERE BROUGHT A LOADED, CHAMBERED WEAPON, WITH THE SAFETY OFF, and then PULLED THE TRIGGER while picking it up.

Put him in jail for a lengthy time... accidental shootings should be treated the same as a DUI wreck resulting in attempted manslaughter charges or worse.

He had to make so many inexcusable errors for this to happen that I can think of no other recourse other than to make examples out of people.

/and I'm a gun nut


THIS A THOUSAND TIMES. How is this shiathead not charged with reckless endangerment or criminal negligence?
The way the law is now, if you give alcohol to a college student who gets in a wreck 2 hours later, you can go to jail for it, but if you bring a loaded weapon into a public place with the safety off and shoot 3 people, they write it off as "just an accident?"

This is like a story earlier this week, a DA in Pennsylvannia refused to charge a guy who "accidentally" shot his kid. He went into a gun shop to sell his pistol, the gun shop didn't want it, and when he got back in the car, the kid grabbed the barrel of the gun, it went off, and the kid was killed. The idiot forgot that while the clip was out, a round was still in the chamber. A guy didn't make sure his gun was unloaded and pointed it at his own child, and authorities said it was "just an accident?"

Bullshiat. Maybe if we started sending some of these numbskulls to jail, people would stop being such dumbasses around their firearms and these "accidents" would stop happening.
 
2013-01-19 11:33:50 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!


I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.

100/100

[image.blingee.com image 400x363]


Can you throw a crying eagle in there too?
 
2013-01-19 11:34:43 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: You're neglecting the fact these people were turning out for Gun Appreciation Day to send a message to the rest of the country about how they feel about limiting the rights of responsible gun owners.


they were there to check out the racks...on other men....
 
2013-01-19 11:35:09 PM  
Did any books get shot? No? Treadmills then?
 
2013-01-19 11:36:03 PM  

Mugato: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fortunately, we only lost 219 people today as the price we pay for the freedom to drink alcohol.

eagerly awaiting the typical "THAT'S DIFFERENT!" response from the alcoholics.

I think the difference being that there isn't a convention where people get together and show each other how awesome and knowledgeable they are about booze. And if they do it's called a kegger and when people get alcohol poisoning it's considered funny as the gun equivalent it is here.


They're called Beer Festivals and they usually result in mass vomiting and collapsing in corners as their worst casualties.
 
2013-01-19 11:36:16 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.


You must not live in real 'merica
 
2013-01-19 11:36:29 PM  
Please wait as I play the world's saddest song on the world's smallest violin to commemorate these responsible, law-abiding gun owners.
 
2013-01-19 11:37:44 PM  

Shagbert: Mugato: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fortunately, we only lost 219 people today as the price we pay for the freedom to drink alcohol.

eagerly awaiting the typical "THAT'S DIFFERENT!" response from the alcoholics.

I think the difference being that there isn't a convention where people get together and show each other how awesome and knowledgeable they are about booze. And if they do it's called a kegger and when people get alcohol poisoning it's considered funny as the gun equivalent it is here.

They're called Beer Festivals and they usually result in mass vomiting and collapsing in corners as their worst casualties.


Until the drive home. At least they don't shiat where they eat, I guess.
 
2013-01-19 11:38:06 PM  

boobsrgood: Did any books get shot? No? Treadmills then?


i heard a vending machine got hit and three pounds of sugared lard got onto the floor and they thought one of those guys might have been hit... then it bounced off that and hit a portable gravy maker kiosk and thats when people got really worried...

we wouldn't want to lose a patriot like that....in the line of duty and all...

it's best when they get enraged and die of a heart attack in front of the fondue machine...
 
2013-01-19 11:38:42 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: You're neglecting the fact these people were turning out for Gun Appreciation Day to send a message to the rest of the country about how they feel about limiting the rights of responsible gun owners.


No, I'm not. You're neglecting to consider what baseline you compare against. The baseline of "zero gun injuries per day" is unrealistic, and statistically not supported. The baseline of "a few, probably 5-10" gun injuries per day is normal, and by all appearances that's exactly what we got: normalcy.

It would be ironic if today was gun appreciation day and we had way more injuries that normal, which we didn't. The fact that we didn't have zero gun injuries doesn't mean anything.

Like I said upthread, there are something like 80,000,000 gun owners in the country, and probably 5 or so of them did something stupid enough to injure another person (on accident, not counting malicious actions). If we had the same ratio of automobile accidents by car owners as we do with gun accidents by gun owners then we'd have about twenty car accidents daily. In the nation.
 
2013-01-19 11:39:15 PM  
Once, when I worked at a bicycle trade show, I got a nasty cut on my hand from a chain ring.

We should ban bicycles.

This week is Sundance Festival near where I live. No doubt, lots of Californians are going to break collarbones, blow out their knees or at least pick up killer hangovers from drinking at 7000 feet.

We should ban movies, skiing and snowboarding.
 
2013-01-19 11:39:23 PM  

3StratMan: 3 idiots do something stupid with guns, therefore we should take away everyones right to own firearms?


Hyperbole much?
 
2013-01-19 11:40:22 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.


Same here. But that's the problem with stupid people, they're so damn clever when it comes to farking up.
 
2013-01-19 11:41:54 PM  

Fubini: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: You're neglecting the fact these people were turning out for Gun Appreciation Day to send a message to the rest of the country about how they feel about limiting the rights of responsible gun owners.

No, I'm not. You're neglecting to consider what baseline you compare against. The baseline of "zero gun injuries per day" is unrealistic, and statistically not supported. The baseline of "a few, probably 5-10" gun injuries per day is normal, and by all appearances that's exactly what we got: normalcy.

It would be ironic if today was gun appreciation day and we had way more injuries that normal, which we didn't. The fact that we didn't have zero gun injuries doesn't mean anything.

Like I said upthread, there are something like 80,000,000 gun owners in the country, and probably 5 or so of them did something stupid enough to injure another person (on accident, not counting malicious actions). If we had the same ratio of automobile accidents by car owners as we do with gun accidents by gun owners then we'd have about twenty car accidents daily. In the nation.


At over thirty thousand a year, we average almost ninety automobile deaths per day in the USA.

Maths, how do they work?
 
2013-01-19 11:42:01 PM  

Pincy: 3StratMan: 3 idiots do something stupid with guns, therefore we should take away everyones right to own firearms?

Hyperbole much?


In case you haven't been paying attention, that's what the thought process of many people is.
 
2013-01-19 11:42:27 PM  
Accidents will happen. I had to fight my way through this very same crowd of proud and well-regulated arms-bearers to get to a coin and stamp show elsewhere at the venue (NC Fairgrounds). While I was at that show, there were several occasions where I heard the "clink" of a coin being dropped -- once, apparently, a pretty valuable one, judging by the muffled swearing that followed. I guess that means that coin owners are even more careless than gun owners.

Of course, nobody from the coin show ended up at the hospital...
 
2013-01-19 11:43:57 PM  
Responsible gun owner.
Except for, you know, that one day at the movie theater.
cbsdetroit.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-01-19 11:45:23 PM  
Fubini:
Like I said upthread, there are something like 80,000,000 gun owners in the country, and probably 5 or so of them did something stupid enough to injure another person (on accident, not counting malicious actions). If we had the same ratio of automobile accidents by car owners as we do with gun accidents by gun owners then we'd have about twenty car accidents daily. In the nation.

I don't know if that is a good analogy, there are maybe 50 to 80 million gun owners in the us, and 209 million licensed drivers. However deaths from guns will overtake deaths from cars maybe even this year, even though there are fewer gun owners than there are licensed drivers, and I have a feeling that people spend more time in their cars than using their guns.  Guns seem to be more dangerous than cars from that perspective.
 
2013-01-19 11:45:40 PM  
There are very, VERY few gun accidents. There is a lot of gun negligence though. If you "accidentally" point a loaded weapon at someone and "accidentally" pull the trigger, that was not an accidental shooting. I'm sure the tens of thousands of never-owned-a-gun-but-obama-is-going-to-outlaw-them-next-month-so-I'm- getting-one-today people don't help either. There was a 2 hour line all day at the Indy show today with Pmags selling for $60 and AR's going for 2-3k, and crates of 223 ammo just under a grand. Fleecing of the suckers.
 
2013-01-19 11:46:08 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!


I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.

100/100

[image.blingee.com image 400x363]

Can you throw a crying eagle in there too?


Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.
 
2013-01-19 11:46:11 PM  

Fubini: It would be ironic if today was gun appreciation day and we had way more injuries that normal, which we didn't. The fact that we didn't have zero gun injuries doesn't mean anything.


You'd have a point if these incidents happened in people's homes or somewhere besides Gun Appreciation Day events.
 
2013-01-19 11:46:54 PM  
i'm glad i don't live in Gunmerica....

see, the last thing i would want is an armada of american fatties in gravy stained Ted Nugent tee shirts trying to save me from some imagined enemy because;

a) you can see the fatties from space
b) you can smell the urine when they cower
c) the chance of getting a "Ned Beatty" from one of those patriotic inbreds is pretty high
d) they are terrible shots
e) the bald spots are worse than a giant scope as far as reflections go
f) they would be hammerin away at themselves, moanin and groanin before they could get a real round off
g) the trail of fast food wrappers would give away the position
h) the parking lot full of giant trucks with baby seats under the gunracks are a dead giveaway
i) who wants to be near a bunch of fat retarded americans with guns?

shall i go on?
 
2013-01-19 11:47:29 PM  

jaytkay: Responsible gun owner.


Um, no.

He's pretty much the posterchild of the irresponsible one.
 
2013-01-19 11:49:16 PM  

GUTSU: Gyrfalcon: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!


I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.

100/100

[image.blingee.com image 400x363]

Can you throw a crying eagle in there too?

Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.


Can YOU throw a "n*gger" in there too?
 
2013-01-19 11:50:34 PM  

GUTSU: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.


i'm under a delisoin yes....

i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-19 11:50:47 PM  

hubiestubert: Most gun owners are fairly responsible. The problem is, that there are enough yahoos and idiots who KEEP doing idiotic things, and NOT being castigated for it, by the community. Instead, we have folks who leap to the defense. Or to minimize their idiocy, which is the tack you're taking.


No, it reinforces the fact that human beings are terrible with large numbers. There are 310,000,000 guns in this country, there are going to be accidental shootings no matter how careful people are. No amount of carefulness is going to completely eliminate all accidents. The correct question is, "How responsible can we expect people to be?" If you expect people to be perfectly careful and never have any accidents, ever, then you're being unrealistic (you can put a mean-time-to-accident on a nuclear power plant, and those cost billions of dollars to operate).

The fact that we have 5-10 gun accidents daily with 80 million gun owners in the nation means that the overwhelming majority of those people are being perfectly responsible. Even if only one percent of gun owners handle their weapons on any given day (and you know it's way more than that because of people who use guns in their line of work) you'd have 5-10 gun accidents daily out of 800,000 people handling their guns. Which leads to an accident rate of one out of 80,000 gun uses per day. Meaning, every day you pick up your gun you have a 1/80,000 chance of accidentally injuring yourself or another. Statistically you'd have to pick up your gun and use it daily for over 200 years before accidentally injuring a human being.

As I've been saying all along, whether you think this means gun owners are responsible enough is up to you. But the fact that we've had a few gun injuries today means literally nothing other than we had a perfectly normal day. I've laid out the consequences for that perfectly normal day above.
 
2013-01-19 11:50:57 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: i'm glad i don't live in Gunmerica....

see, the last thing i would want is an armada of american fatties in gravy stained Ted Nugent tee shirts trying to save me from some imagined enemy because;

a) you can see the fatties from space
b) you can smell the urine when they cower
c) the chance of getting a "Ned Beatty" from one of those patriotic inbreds is pretty high
d) they are terrible shots
e) the bald spots are worse than a giant scope as far as reflections go
f) they would be hammerin away at themselves, moanin and groanin before they could get a real round off
g) the trail of fast food wrappers would give away the position
h) the parking lot full of giant trucks with baby seats under the gunracks are a dead giveaway
i) who wants to be near a bunch of fat retarded americans with guns?

shall i go on?


I'm going to admit that you rustled my jimmies a little, just a little. They I think of how subdued you british are, it must be harsh living in Airstrip One.
 
2013-01-19 11:54:07 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

i'm under a delisoin yes....

[i.imgur.com image 640x200]


It seems that you are unable to defeat my arguments, and instead have to attack my grammar. You aren't making a very strong case for yourself, comrade.
 
2013-01-19 11:55:43 PM  

GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!


I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.



i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-19 11:55:55 PM  

GUTSU: I'm going to admit that you rustled my jimmies a little, just a little. They I think of how subdued you british are, it must be harsh living in Airstrip One.


don't let all the stupid out all at once now...

you are getting eaten alive in here...there are a few continents on the planet..countries too...even provinces and states...

i know your knowledge of things like "maps" and "geography" is limited to "two blocks then left...can't miss it..it has the seven and the two ones on the sign...whatever that means..." but that's no reason to make a complete fool of yourself now...
 
2013-01-19 11:57:14 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

Can YOU throw a "n*gger" in there too?


Account created: 2013-01-13 21:40:26

New troll is new.
 
2013-01-19 11:57:23 PM  

TwowheelinTim: At over thirty thousand a year, we average almost ninety automobile deaths per day in the USA.

Maths, how do they work?


I appreciate your comparison, but you have to account for the fact that more cars are used daily than guns, so total numbers aren't directly comparable. This is why the risk of car injury or death is represented in terms of injuries per total miles driven.

To directly compare the danger of driving versus gun use you'd have to have some reasonably comparable metric, like injuries per miles driven versus injuries versus gun uses or something. It's still not directly comparable, but it would allow you to say "I drive X miles per year" and "I carry my gun with me 300 days a year" and figure out what your relative risk of injury from both activities would be.
 
2013-01-19 11:57:59 PM  

GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

i'm under a delisoin yes....

[i.imgur.com image 640x200]

It seems that you are unable to defeat my arguments, and instead have to attack my grammar. You aren't making a very strong case for yourself, comrade.


your argument would have to be intelligent enough to bother with, failing that YOU would have to be intelligent enough to argue with and you aren't.

now go put some more gravy down on the slip and slide and see how much drywall you can knock out at the other end of your mom's basement ok?

sprinkles
 
2013-01-19 11:58:11 PM  
Lighten up gun people. If environmentalists were holding Earth Appreciation Day gatherings today and someone accidentally dumped a bunch of oil into a river most of you would be howling with delight at the irony.

Also, stop pretending that guns aren't dangerous. Every time there's an accident it's because they were an irresponsible gun owner. Ya right. Accidents happen to even the best of us. Notice I'm not saying we should ban all guns, because I'm not. But to pretend that guns pose no risk, even to the most responsible owner, is ridiculous and makes it seem like you aren't discussing this issue in good faith.
 
2013-01-19 11:59:23 PM  

The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Lighten up gun people. If environmentalists were holding Earth Appreciation Day gatherings today and someone accidentally dumped a bunch of oil into a river most of you would be howling with delight at the irony.


yeah...most earth days are a "bring your own oil" kinda event...
 
2013-01-19 11:59:48 PM  
Most sci-fi conventions have apparently stricter security and preventative policies in place, and they only have attendees who show up with fake weapons.
 
2013-01-20 12:00:09 AM  

jaytkay: Responsible gun owner.
Except for, you know, that one day at the movie theater.
[cbsdetroit.files.wordpress.com image 300x452]


You're still farking that dead horse?
 
2013-01-20 12:00:18 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: I'm going to admit that you rustled my jimmies a little, just a little. They I think of how subdued you british are, it must be harsh living in Airstrip One.

don't let all the stupid out all at once now...

you are getting eaten alive in here...there are a few continents on the planet..countries too...even provinces and states...

i know your knowledge of things like "maps" and "geography" is limited to "two blocks then left...can't miss it..it has the seven and the two ones on the sign...whatever that means..." but that's no reason to make a complete fool of yourself now...


Are you not british? They for whatever reason love to poke their noses into american business. If you're not british I'm sorry for the confusion. Also, if I must say you are making quite a few assumptions about me at best, and at worst trying to paint me as an invalid.
 
2013-01-20 12:01:25 AM  

fusillade762: Gyrfalcon:


Account created: 2013-01-13 21:40:26

New troll is new.


yeah but he has more friends on myspace than you do....i mean, since you are throwing around the "value" of things here...

he probably has his comments turned off too...
 
2013-01-20 12:01:29 AM  

GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: I'm going to admit that you rustled my jimmies a little, just a little. They I think of how subdued you british are, it must be harsh living in Airstrip One.

don't let all the stupid out all at once now...

you are getting eaten alive in here...there are a few continents on the planet..countries too...even provinces and states...

i know your knowledge of things like "maps" and "geography" is limited to "two blocks then left...can't miss it..it has the seven and the two ones on the sign...whatever that means..." but that's no reason to make a complete fool of yourself now...

Are you not british? They for whatever reason love to poke their noses into american business. If you're not british I'm sorry for the confusion. Also, if I must say you are making quite a few assumptions about me at best, and at worst trying to paint me as an invalid.


He's probably Dutch. The Dutch are scum.
 
2013-01-20 12:02:34 AM  

doglover: jaytkay: Responsible gun owner.

Um, no.

He's pretty much the posterchild of the irresponsible one.


Pretty much this. The media painting him as a responsible gun owner is nothing short of unintended sarcasm. People think media=fact though.
 
2013-01-20 12:02:36 AM  

Farker Soze: GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU:

He's probably Dutch. The Dutch are scum.


it's the wooden shoes and the windmills i tell ya...
 
2013-01-20 12:03:15 AM  

fusillade762: Gyrfalcon: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

Can YOU throw a "n*gger" in there too?

Account created: 2013-01-13 21:40:26

New troll is new.


Speaking of controls, there needs to be a lengthy waiting period for commenting after creating an account on Fark. 6 months sounds about right.
 
2013-01-20 12:04:09 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: Farker Soze: GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU:

He's probably Dutch. The Dutch are scum.

it's the wooden shoes and the windmills i tell ya...


If it's Dutch, it ain't much.
 
2013-01-20 12:04:34 AM  
There was a lot more accidental sodomy at Chik-Fil-A Appreciation Day than accidental shootings at today's Gun Pride Parades.
 
2013-01-20 12:04:44 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Lighten up gun people. If environmentalists were holding Earth Appreciation Day gatherings today and someone accidentally dumped a bunch of oil into a river most of you would be howling with delight at the irony.

yeah...most earth days are a "bring your own oil" kinda event...


Ya, the event was being held in San Diego and a Green Peace boat was docked for the event and it sprung a leak.

Seriously, you know that I'm right and the best you could do is try to mock my chosen analogy. I take that as a compliment.
 
2013-01-20 12:06:00 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

i'm under a delisoin yes....

[i.imgur.com image 640x200]

It seems that you are unable to defeat my arguments, and instead have to attack my grammar. You aren't making a very strong case for yourself, comrade.

your argument would have to be intelligent enough to bother with, failing that YOU would have to be intelligent enough to argue with and you aren't.

now go put some more gravy down on the slip and slide and see how much drywall you can knock out at the other end of your mom's basement ok?

sprinkles


The fact of the matter is that Obama had made promises, close down gitmo, repeal the patriot act, make new jobs, ect, ect. What he has done is the complete opposite, which for whatever reason you're avoiding. It's okay if you like Obama, I don't think he's the second coming of Hitler, I just think he's a shiatty president.

You have several choices, we could talk like civilized people, or you could continue to attack my character if that makes you feel better.
 
2013-01-20 12:06:52 AM  

Shagbert: hubiestubert: Seriously. It's not hard to keep a weapon unloaded. And you should be treating EVERY weapon like it's loaded anyhow. What in the chocolate covered f*ck are these idiots thinking?
I have no idea why, but I'm sitting here laughing hysterically at "what in the chocolate covered f*ck".


They were thinking that maybe a murderous lib would show up and try to shoot them all, so they'd better be prepared.

/You know some of them did. Or hoped.
 
2013-01-20 12:07:21 AM  

Saturn5: brewswane: the gun-control movement is a bunch of old, out-of-touch white people, clinging to the politics of the last century.

That would be the 20th century, where the politics of this nation stopped the rise of Fascists, Nazis, Communists and Socialists in the various global and regional wars? True, those ideals may not have as many supporters today.


And we replaced many of those with dictatorships of our own while destabilizing many areas even further in our "WE ARE RIGHT" campaign of making the entire world just like us.

How was that different from what the Soviet Union tried to do?
 
2013-01-20 12:07:34 AM  

GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: I'm going to admit that you rustled my jimmies a little, just a little. They I think of how subdued you british are, it must be harsh living in Airstrip One.

don't let all the stupid out all at once now...

you are getting eaten alive in here...there are a few continents on the planet..countries too...even provinces and states...

i know your knowledge of things like "maps" and "geography" is limited to "two blocks then left...can't miss it..it has the seven and the two ones on the sign...whatever that means..." but that's no reason to make a complete fool of yourself now...

Are you not british?
They for whatever reason love to poke their noses into american business. If you're not british I'm sorry for the confusion. Also, if I must say you are making quite a few assumptions about me at best, and at worst trying to paint me as an invalid.


no, invalids usually can't hamfist a bunch of wordwank out on granny's 486 like you can..or as fast...

you just sound like you aren't very bright and if you are falling for my trolls, you are a bigger sucker than i thought...

but please....continue...i brought the popcorn maker into the office here so i got all the time in the world...

and its you gunmericans who stick your noses into everything..it's why you are a despised and ridiculed nation in most of the civilized countries of the world...

"they want to nationalize their fruit fields and railways??? thats a murderin!"

i'll give you twenty bucks if you can read the first two pages of a Denny's menu without moving your lips how's that...
 
2013-01-20 12:08:29 AM  

The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Haliburton Cummings: The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Lighten up gun people. If environmentalists were holding Earth Appreciation Day gatherings today and someone accidentally dumped a bunch of oil into a river most of you would be howling with delight at the irony.

yeah...most earth days are a "bring your own oil" kinda event...

Ya, the event was being held in San Diego and a Green Peace boat was docked for the event and it sprung a leak.

Seriously, you know that I'm right and the best you could do is try to mock my chosen analogy. I take that as a compliment.


Oh, I thought of an even better one. Al Grove drove across country in his gas guzzling SUV to attend the event. What part of Earth Appreciation Day does he not understand?
 
2013-01-20 12:08:32 AM  

The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Lighten up gun people. If environmentalists were holding Earth Appreciation Day gatherings today and someone accidentally dumped a bunch of oil into a river most of you would be howling with delight at the irony.


www.roflcat.com

The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: But to pretend that guns pose no risk, even to the most responsible owner, is ridiculous and makes it seem like you aren't discussing this issue in good faith.


Under normal circumstances, they do pose no risk to responsible owners. Absolutely none. Follow a few basic rules, and you'll never have an accident. And when I say under normal circumstances, I'm only thinking of the possibility that you might have a seizure the moment you touch the gun, and shoot while you're convulsing uncontrollably, but that's about it. And before you say it...

static.cdn-seekingalpha.com
 
2013-01-20 12:09:13 AM  
Libtard false flag ops?
 
2013-01-20 12:10:05 AM  
The fact of the matter is that Obama had made promises, close down gitmo, repeal the patriot act, make new jobs, ect, ect. What he has done is the complete opposite, which for whatever reason you're avoiding. It's okay if you like Obama, I don't think he's the second coming of Hitler, I just think he's a shiatty president.

You have several choices, we could talk like civilized people, or you could continue to attack my character if that makes you feel better.


no i love all the characters in the reality show of american politics...i like the Joker AND i like Batman because it's entertainment...

it's when people like yourself come in and poke at the clay pigeons that i question your intelligence...

"snookis policy on....."

obama is irrelevant...
 
2013-01-20 12:10:31 AM  
I like how accidental discharges of firearms are now on the same level as criminal acts with firearms. So a jack stand failing while changing the tire on my car and crushing my foot is the same as driving through a crowded farmers market with the intention of injuring people and taking lives.

Sounds about right.....

/how many millions were not hurt with firearms at gun shows today
//negativity and sensationalism works best for the media and ratings
 
2013-01-20 12:10:52 AM  
I celebrated gun appreciation day with railguns. For the greater good, of course.
 
2013-01-20 12:12:27 AM  
lh6.googleusercontent.com

Choose wisely.
 
2013-01-20 12:12:57 AM  
Guns are never dangerous
Guns are only dangerous if no one else around is armed
Guns are only dangerous in the hands of criminals
Guns are literally no more dangerous than hammers, which is why the government pays so much to equip our troops with assault hammers
 
2013-01-20 12:12:57 AM  

The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Haliburton Cummings: The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Lighten up gun people. If environmentalists were holding Earth Appreciation Day gatherings today and someone accidentally dumped a bunch of oil into a river most of you would be howling with delight at the irony.

yeah...most earth days are a "bring your own oil" kinda event...

Ya, the event was being held in San Diego and a Green Peace boat was docked for the event and it sprung a leak.

Seriously, you know that I'm right and the best you could do is try to mock my chosen analogy. I take that as a compliment.

Oh, I thought of an even better one. Al Grove drove across country in his gas guzzling SUV to attend the event. What part of Earth Appreciation Day does he not understand?


here is a better one...

yaaaawwwnnnnn

greenpeace.... you gotta be joking....

al gore...more haw haw...

give up. go green. do yourself in.
 
2013-01-20 12:13:57 AM  

3StratMan: 3 idiots do something stupid with guns, therefore we should take away everyones right to own firearms?

Shiat, with that logic, we a should immediately take away everyone's right to vote after electing farkwads that spend the country into a $16 trillion dollar debt, happily guts our military into damn near laughing stock status, and pretty much spits on the constitution daily.

Oh wait, I forgot... It's OK, since it's YOUR guys doing it. And "but but but but Bush".


Maybe you could show us where and when Obama said he was taking away all guns from all Americans. I've seen you people constantly screaming this, but I've never been able to find it.

"But he'd never say it outright, he's planning to...", yes yes yes, and Elvis was really Bigfoot and he shot JFK before leaving with the Reptilians to Planet Ummo through the Bermuda Triangle.
 
2013-01-20 12:14:22 AM  
The funny thing is. The original version of the story was a police officer standing at the entrance with his un-holstered gun, unloading it, so he could walk in and be a guard.

The Huffingpost article that said officer, which someone posted on facebook is now saying a guy with a shotgun.
 
2013-01-20 12:14:29 AM  

rhiannon: fusillade762: Gyrfalcon: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

Can YOU throw a "n*gger" in there too?

Account created: 2013-01-13 21:40:26

New troll is new.

Speaking of controls, there needs to be a lengthy waiting period for commenting after creating an account on Fark. 6 months sounds about right.


Oh sure, but the next thing you'll want is background checks and an FBI database and the banning of Fark assault accounts.
 
2013-01-20 12:14:55 AM  
RabidJade:
/how many millions were not hurt with firearms at gun shows today
//negativity and sensationalism works best for the media and ratings


Yeah, millions of school kids didn't get shot in the face multiple times that day, why don't they report on that?
 
2013-01-20 12:15:11 AM  

whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?


yes, I am curious about the configuration of this 'torso.'
 
2013-01-20 12:15:15 AM  

RabidJade: I like how accidental discharges of firearms are now on the same level as criminal acts with firearms. So a jack stand failing while changing the tire on my car and crushing my foot is the same as driving through a crowded farmers market with the intention of injuring people and taking lives.


How are you "accidentally" causing your guns to go off?
 
2013-01-20 12:15:50 AM  

brewswane: the gun-control movement is a bunch of old, out-of-touch white people, clinging to the politics of the last century.


I'm an old, out-of-touch white guy, and I approve of this message.
 
2013-01-20 12:15:56 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: I'm going to admit that you rustled my jimmies a little, just a little. They I think of how subdued you british are, it must be harsh living in Airstrip One.

don't let all the stupid out all at once now...

you are getting eaten alive in here...there are a few continents on the planet..countries too...even provinces and states...

i know your knowledge of things like "maps" and "geography" is limited to "two blocks then left...can't miss it..it has the seven and the two ones on the sign...whatever that means..." but that's no reason to make a complete fool of yourself now...

Are you not british? They for whatever reason love to poke their noses into american business. If you're not british I'm sorry for the confusion. Also, if I must say you are making quite a few assumptions about me at best, and at worst trying to paint me as an invalid.

no, invalids usually can't hamfist a bunch of wordwank out on granny's 486 like you can..or as fast...

you just sound like you aren't very bright and if you are falling for my trolls, you are a bigger sucker than i thought...

but please....continue...i brought the popcorn maker into the office here so i got all the time in the world...

and its you gunmericans who stick your noses into everything..it's why you are a despised and ridiculed nation in most of the civilized countries of the world...

"they want to nationalize their fruit fields and railways??? thats a murderin!"

i'll give you twenty bucks if you can read the first two pages of a Denny's menu without moving your lips how's that...


Silly me for thinking that you might want to have a constructive conversation, It seems that there is nothing to be gained from talking to you as you're more interested trying to demonize the other side. Have a nice night.
 
2013-01-20 12:16:14 AM  

fusillade762: rhiannon: fusillade762: Gyrfalcon: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

Can YOU throw a "n*gger" in there too?

Account created: 2013-01-13 21:40:26

New troll is new.

Speaking of controls, there needs to be a lengthy waiting period for commenting after creating an account on Fark. 6 months sounds about right.

Oh sure, but the next thing you'll want is background checks and an FBI database and the banning of Fark assault accounts.


no no...that's not an assault account...they look the same but the assault account has a longer barrel and a switch that goes FULL RETARD..

let me find 20 links and post them here...
 
2013-01-20 12:16:48 AM  

fusillade762: rhiannon: fusillade762: Gyrfalcon: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

Can YOU throw a "n*gger" in there too?

Account created: 2013-01-13 21:40:26

New troll is new.

Speaking of controls, there needs to be a lengthy waiting period for commenting after creating an account on Fark. 6 months sounds about right.

Oh sure, but the next thing you'll want is background checks and an FBI database and the banning of Fark assault accounts.


Awesome I'll start making my list...
 
2013-01-20 12:17:41 AM  
Today was Gun Appreciation Day. Did see this; did you hear about this? There were five accidental shootings injuring eight people. This thing had more accidental discharges than the Spearamint Rhino's champagne room.

/read in Jay Leno's voice
 
2013-01-20 12:18:49 AM  

GUTSU: Gyrfalcon: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Farking Canuck: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Show some respect! These are the elite warriors that are going to overthrow the evil black man in the white house!!


I know you're being facetious, do I think Obama is a pretty shiatty president? Yeah, I do. I thought bush was a jackass for the patriot act, unwarranted wiretapping, and I hate Obama for expanding the patriot act and thinking that indefinably detaining American citizens without a warrant is peachy. I don't believe that Obama will still be in office if and when there is armed insurrection.

Also, your attempts to try and connect legal gun owners to crazed racists is quite hilarious, or it would be if a great many Obama supporters didn't think like you.

100/100

[image.blingee.com image 400x363]

Can you throw a crying eagle in there too?

Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.


Obama tried to do something about Gitmo, but Republicans (and some Democrats) were terrified of having those horrible evil terrorists on American soil, lest they corrupt the very earth beneath their feet and it seeps out and infects people like the plague of undeath from WarCraft, so they screamed and fought and prevented anything from being done with Gitmo.
 
2013-01-20 12:19:22 AM  

GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: I'm going to admit that you rustled my jimmies a little, just a little. They I think of how subdued you british are, it must be harsh living in Airstrip One.

don't let all the stupid out all at once now...

you are getting eaten alive in here...there are a few continents on the planet..countries too...even provinces and states...

i know your knowledge of things like "maps" and "geography" is limited to "two blocks then left...can't miss it..it has the seven and the two ones on the sign...whatever that means..." but that's no reason to make a complete fool of yourself now...

Are you not british? They for whatever reason love to poke their noses into american business. If you're not british I'm sorry for the confusion. Also, if I must say you are making quite a few assumptions about me at best, and at worst trying to paint me as an invalid.

no, invalids usually can't hamfist a bunch of wordwank out on granny's 486 like you can..or as fast...

you just sound like you aren't very bright and if you are falling for my trolls, you are a bigger sucker than i thought...

but please....continue...i brought the popcorn maker into the office here so i got all the time in the world...

and its you gunmericans who stick your noses into everything..it's why you are a despised and ridiculed nation in most of the civilized countries of the world...

"they want to nationalize their fruit fields and railways??? thats a murderin!"

i'll give you twenty bucks if you can read the first two pages of a Denny's menu without moving your lips how's that...

Silly me for thinking that you might want to have a constructive conversation, It seems that there is nothing to be gained from talking to you as you're more interested trying to demonize the other side. Have a nice night.


listen glitterpants, you want to have a constructive conversation, get outside, get some fresh air and meet someone new... go help your neighbors build a bookcase...
help someone across the street...

get off the internet...for awhile....trust me....it's fun that crazy ol world out there...even with all the nutters in it...

that said, you have a good night and stay safe...no sarcasm there...


Muah,

Exxon Splooge
 
HBK
2013-01-20 12:20:34 AM  
There should be a safety class or maybe a range safety certification process to be able to purchase a gun. It's really just too easy.

Lots of gun owners out there who are too dumb or ignorant to own guns. Especially with the recent run on guns, you see idiots negligently pointing guns at people at the range and keeping their finger on the trigger whenever they're holding a gun. It's dangerous. Same goes with CHL. I know a fellow who shot a gun exactly once before taking the class and getting certified. Maybe they need an hours requirement like pilots have or something.

/gun owner
 
2013-01-20 12:21:33 AM  

rhiannon: fusillade762: rhiannon: fusillade762: Gyrfalcon: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

Can YOU throw a "n*gger" in there too?

Account created: 2013-01-13 21:40:26

New troll is new.

Speaking of controls, there needs to be a lengthy waiting period for commenting after creating an account on Fark. 6 months sounds about right.

Oh sure, but the next thing you'll want is background checks and an FBI database and the banning of Fark assault accounts.

Awesome I'll start making my list...


my list has more friends on friendster than yours does and i have more followers on twitter too..

nah nah nah nah nah

COME ON PEOPLE THIS IS ABOUT THE GUNS!!!!!!
MOAR WITH THE GUNZ!!!


stay on point....
 
2013-01-20 12:22:02 AM  

RabidJade: I like how accidental discharges of firearms are now on the same level as criminal acts with firearms.


Let us know when you find a shooting which does not involve a firearm. Please.

We anxiously await your valuable insight.
 
2013-01-20 12:22:32 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Under normal circumstances, they do pose no risk to responsible owners. Absolutely none. Follow a few basic rules, and you'll never have an accident. And when I say under normal circumstances, I'm only thinking of the possibility that you might have a seizure the moment you touch the gun, and shoot while you're convulsing uncontrollably, but that's about it. And before you say it...


And you'll never have an accident...until you have an accident. Just like the people at these shows today.

Again, I'm not in favor of taking away everyone's guns. There is no reason to be scared of me. I accepted the fact that guns will always be a part of our society long ago. But to say they pose no risk, "Absolutely none", is just ridiculous and makes me not want to believe anything else you say. It's as if admitting that guns have a risk, even to the most responsible gun owner, is somehow admitting defeat. It's not. It's being realistic. Ya, maybe that risk isn't very high for most gun owners. But you said "Absolutely none", which means zero to me, and that tells me you can't be honest about it.

I repeat, I am not in favor of taking your guns away. I will admit that things like the AWB probably will have no affect on gun violence. But that's because I'm honest about it.
 
2013-01-20 12:22:46 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: i'm glad i don't live in Gunmerica....

see, the last thing i would want is an armada of american fatties in gravy stained Ted Nugent tee shirts trying to save me from some imagined enemy because;

a) you can see the fatties from space
b) you can smell the urine when they cower
c) the chance of getting a "Ned Beatty" from one of those patriotic inbreds is pretty high
d) they are terrible shots
e) the bald spots are worse than a giant scope as far as reflections go
f) they would be hammerin away at themselves, moanin and groanin before they could get a real round off
g) the trail of fast food wrappers would give away the position
h) the parking lot full of giant trucks with baby seats under the gunracks are a dead giveaway
i) who wants to be near a bunch of fat retarded americans with guns?

shall i go on?


Feel free to stay in Spain.
 
2013-01-20 12:23:18 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Haliburton Cummings: The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Lighten up gun people. If environmentalists were holding Earth Appreciation Day gatherings today and someone accidentally dumped a bunch of oil into a river most of you would be howling with delight at the irony.

yeah...most earth days are a "bring your own oil" kinda event...

Ya, the event was being held in San Diego and a Green Peace boat was docked for the event and it sprung a leak.

Seriously, you know that I'm right and the best you could do is try to mock my chosen analogy. I take that as a compliment.

Oh, I thought of an even better one. Al Grove drove across country in his gas guzzling SUV to attend the event. What part of Earth Appreciation Day does he not understand?

here is a better one...

yaaaawwwnnnnn

greenpeace.... you gotta be joking....

al gore...more haw haw...

give up. go green. do yourself in.


In other words, you got nothin.
 
2013-01-20 12:23:27 AM  

Fubini: hubiestubert: Most gun owners are fairly responsible. The problem is, that there are enough yahoos and idiots who KEEP doing idiotic things, and NOT being castigated for it, by the community. Instead, we have folks who leap to the defense. Or to minimize their idiocy, which is the tack you're taking.

No, it reinforces the fact that human beings are terrible with large numbers. There are 310,000,000 guns in this country, there are going to be accidental shootings no matter how careful people are. No amount of carefulness is going to completely eliminate all accidents. The correct question is, "How responsible can we expect people to be?" If you expect people to be perfectly careful and never have any accidents, ever, then you're being unrealistic


It's unrealistic to expect "responsible gun owners" to always make sure their weapon is unloaded before putting it in the case? That's one of the first things covered in safety courses.
This guy was negligent, and because of his carelessness, 3 people are in the hospital and could have been killed. It's farking retarded to try to write off someone who put hundreds of people in danger through sheer stupidity by just saying "Oh, well. Accidents happen."
 
2013-01-20 12:23:49 AM  
Proof that a time machine will never, ever be invented.

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not read as:
"A well regulated* Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

(pencilled underneath)
* Well regulated meaning, in this case, self regulated. Seriously, ancient Americans, a firearm is a weapon and not a toy. Please teach your descendents to observe their civic right with sobriety and responsibility. I'm from the year 2089 and because of three hundred years of gun-nut retards I'm not allowed to have even a BB gun. Thanks a lot, jerks."
 
2013-01-20 12:25:21 AM  
obama this, obama that...Mutual of Obamahaw the other...

when are you clownshows going to realize how impotent your political system is?

"if only the corporate overlords let those right wingers in there..."

"if only they had more choices than Pepsi and Coke because they really are both sugared water..."

"i can choose between the red dot and the blue dot...i have free will"

you know what?

it's a show....
 
2013-01-20 12:26:06 AM  
WISH TV 8 interviewed a bozo at the Indy show.

"Just like we were sayin' at the woodworking show over there, somebody coulda cut there finger off with a saw"

derp

But they didn't.
 
2013-01-20 12:27:18 AM  
The only thing gun registration has been used for in this country is to grandfather in ownership of banned guns.

/just sayin
 
2013-01-20 12:28:44 AM  
Post Willy Wonka Mexican drug cartel getting free guns from obama irony here.
 
2013-01-20 12:29:10 AM  

Darth Macho: Proof that a time machine will never, ever be invented.


actually, entropy is that very proof.... time as we understand it only works in one direction...


you can have your multiplex of worlds theory or your stringbean theory, but it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that time travel is a human delusion...sorry..deli-sign...

but dude, never bring a time machine to a gun fight...
 
2013-01-20 12:29:57 AM  

Codenamechaz: Sim Tree: 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.

WHAT?! In the act of removing your gun from its case, you accidentally shot three entirely different people?! WTFingHell are you doing?!

I think the better question is "Why the hell was your gun on display LOADED?!"


sounds like it was in the process of being ziptied so the gun won't come alive by itself and murder people like it's supposed to do
 
2013-01-20 12:31:02 AM  

Darth Macho: Proof that a time machine will never, ever be invented.

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not read as:
"A well regulated* Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

(pencilled underneath)
* Well regulated meaning, in this case, self regulated. Seriously, ancient Americans, a firearm is a weapon and not a toy. Please teach your descendents to observe their civic right with sobriety and responsibility. I'm from the year 2089 and because of three hundred years of gun-nut retards I'm not allowed to have even a BB gun. Thanks a lot, jerks."


I would love to be able to go back in time and ask the founding fathers "Is this REALLY what you had in mind?"
 
2013-01-20 12:31:53 AM  

tjfly: Post Willy Wonka Mexican drug cartel getting free guns from obama irony here.


how does the rest go?

"blood on the streets in the town of New Haven...."
 
2013-01-20 12:33:23 AM  

KarmicDisaster: Fubini:
Like I said upthread, there are something like 80,000,000 gun owners in the country, and probably 5 or so of them did something stupid enough to injure another person (on accident, not counting malicious actions). If we had the same ratio of automobile accidents by car owners as we do with gun accidents by gun owners then we'd have about twenty car accidents daily. In the nation.

I don't know if that is a good analogy, there are maybe 50 to 80 million gun owners in the us, and 209 million licensed drivers. However deaths from guns will overtake deaths from cars maybe even this year, even though there are fewer gun owners than there are licensed drivers, and I have a feeling that people spend more time in their cars than using their guns.  Guns seem to be more dangerous than cars from that perspective.


I haven't done the numbers on total gun injuries, just accidental. According to mortality data from 2011, something like 500 people died that year from accidental gun shootings. If you assume gunshots are 95% survivable (which is the number I hear quoted most often, assuming you get medical attention), that means there were something like 10,000 total accidental gun injuries (including deaths)

A recent gallup poll on gun ownership found that 34% of national adults said that they personally owned a gun. According to Wikipedia, there are about 240,000,000 adults in the US, which gives us an estimated 80,000,000 total gun owners.

If you have 10,000 accidental injuries distributed uniformly across all gun owners, that means a gun owner has a yearly risk equal to 80M/10K = 1/8,000 of injuring someone. This is clearly a gross approximation, but it's an honest approximation within it's limits. This means that the average person would need to own a gun for 8000 years before they (statistically) injure someone.

If we use this number to run the same experiment I did above, using your number of 209M licensed car drivers with a yearly accident risk of 1/8000, we'd have 26,125 automobile accidents, yearly. According to census data, there were 10.8 million car accidents in 2009. From this very rough approximation, it's not looking good for car drivers.

Your criticism addresses one of my assumptions, which is that guns carry a perpetual risk of just being around. Your complaint is that guns are used much less frequently than cars are, on average, which is a completely legitimate complaint. To do so, let's make some assumptions and use that to calculate the average risk of gun usage on an hourly basis, and do that as well with cars.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that the 80,000,000 gun owners in the US will, on average, use their guns for one hour a week. This is a very messy assumption, because there are people who use guns in their job (like LEOs) who are in contact with their guns most of the day, and there are people like me who does guns 100% recreationally and goes to the range less than once per month. Then, you have an estimated 10,000 yearly accidental gun injuries and 80M*1hr/wk*52wk = 4160M total gun-hours per year. Thus, you have your accidental gun injuries uniformly distributed over all gun-hours and you get a 1/416,000 chance of accidental gun injury per gun-use-hour. If you assume that everyone is more like me (and say they spend one hour using a gun per month) you get a 1/96,000 chance of accidental gun injury per gun-use-hour. In decimal that's 0.0000024 and 0.000010, respectively.

For cars, we use the Census data of 10,8M car accidents per year. Assume we have 210M car drivers who spend 4 hours per day in their cars. You'd get 210M*4*365 = 306.6B total car-hours per year. If we randomly distribute all car accidents you get 10.8M/306.6B, which is 0.000035 chance of car accident per car-use-hour.

If you count out all the zeroes, you find that car usage is significantly more dangerous than gun usage in either case. On one extreme you get that car usage is 3.5 times more dangerous than gun usage (on an hourly basis), on the other extreme you get that car usage is 14.6 times more dangerous than gun usage is, on an accident-per-accident basis.

I'm sure there are lots of criticisms you can come up with of this analysis as well. For example, I don't know what kinds of car accidents are reported by the Census people, so perhaps gun accidents are much more severe than a lot of car accidents. Perhaps they're not. I'm just some jerk on the internet who likes to argue. However, I think that all the assumptions I've made are pretty reasonable, so the take-away message is that gun usage is definitely no more dangerous to society than car usage is on an hour-by-hour basis, and is in fact likely much safer. Which you'd expect, because people in general aren't idiots, and most of the ones who have guns have had it drilled into them from the start that GUNS ARE DANGEROUS and should be TREATED AS SUCH.
 
2013-01-20 12:33:47 AM  

GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Haliburton Cummings: GUTSU: Are you suggesting that Obama didn't fight to be able to indefinitely detain American citizens without a trial? Or are you under the delisoin that he bulldozed gitmo into the ground? Face it, the only thing Obama has going for him is his oratory skills, other than that he's a half-black bush.

i'm under a delisoin yes....

[i.imgur.com image 640x200]

It seems that you are unable to defeat my arguments, and instead have to attack my grammar. You aren't making a very strong case for yourself, comrade.

your argument would have to be intelligent enough to bother with, failing that YOU would have to be intelligent enough to argue with and you aren't.

now go put some more gravy down on the slip and slide and see how much drywall you can knock out at the other end of your mom's basement ok?

sprinkles

The fact of the matter is that Obama had made promises, close down gitmo, repeal the patriot act, make new jobs, ect, ect. What he has done is the complete opposite, which for whatever reason you're avoiding. It's okay if you like Obama, I don't think he's the second coming of Hitler, I just think he's a shiatty president.

You have several choices, we could talk like civilized people, or you could continue to attack my character if that makes you feel better.


This is Fark, you better get used to having your character attacked on an hourly basis.
 
2013-01-20 12:34:28 AM  
So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows? People get hurt at car races. Do you want to ban the Indy 500 because someone might wreck at the next one?

People get hurt at football games. Let's ban football.

People get hurt at wrestling matches. Let's ban wrestling.

Asshats who text while driving cause wrecks. People who drive while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs kill people every day. Let's ban cars.

People get killed all the time in skydiving accidents. Let's ban sky diving.

People get killed in scuba diving accidents. Let's ban scuba diving.

People get killed in boating accidents. Let's ban boating.

People die on the operating table when something goes wrong. Let's ban surgery.

Every day people die in accidents. Let's ban any activity that can result in a fatal accident.

People commit violent crimes with knives. Let's ban knives.

People commit violent crimes with hammers. Let's ban hammers.

People commit violent crimes with bits of pipe. Let's ban pipe.

People commit violent crimes with rocks. Let's ban rocks.

People commit violent crimes with arrows. Let's ban archery.

People often kill others when they commit arson. Let's ban anything that burns or can be used to start a fire.
 
2013-01-20 12:34:45 AM  
I have to agree with people suspecting these events are probably caused by novice gun owne.....wait, something is coming in.


Police in Medina say a gun dealer was checking out a semi-automatic handgun he'd bought Saturday when he accidentally pulled the trigger.

Police say the gun's magazine had been removed from the firearm but one round remained in the chamber.


derrrrrrrp
 
2013-01-20 12:37:41 AM  

Kome: Most sci-fi conventions have apparently stricter security and preventative policies in place, and they only have attendees who show up with fake weapons.


Yeah- they should totally prevent people from bringing weapons to gun shows. That'll solve everything.
 
2013-01-20 12:38:34 AM  

PaLarkin: So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows? People get hurt at car races. Do you want to ban the Indy 500 because someone might wreck at the next one?

People get hurt at football games. Let's ban football.

People get hurt at wrestling matches. Let's ban wrestling.

Asshats who text while driving cause wrecks. People who drive while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs kill people every day. Let's ban cars.

People get killed all the time in skydiving accidents. Let's ban sky diving.

People get killed in scuba diving accidents. Let's ban scuba diving.

People get killed in boating accidents. Let's ban boating.

People die on the operating table when something goes wrong. Let's ban surgery.

Every day people die in accidents. Let's ban any activity that can result in a fatal accident.

People commit violent crimes with knives. Let's ban knives.

People commit violent crimes with hammers. Let's ban hammers.

People commit violent crimes with bits of pipe. Let's ban pipe.

People commit violent crimes with rocks. Let's ban rocks.

People commit violent crimes with arrows. Let's ban archery.

People often kill others when they commit arson. Let's ban anything that burns or can be used to start a fire.


What's being banned again?
 
2013-01-20 12:39:41 AM  

PaLarkin: So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows? People get hurt at car races. Do you want to ban the Indy 500 because someone might wreck at the next one?

People get hurt at football games. Let's ban football.

People get hurt at wrestling matches. Let's ban wrestling.

Asshats who text while driving cause wrecks. People who drive while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs kill people every day. Let's ban cars.

People get killed all the time in skydiving accidents. Let's ban sky diving.

People get killed in scuba diving accidents. Let's ban scuba diving.

People get killed in boating accidents. Let's ban boating.

People die on the operating table when something goes wrong. Let's ban surgery.

Every day people die in accidents. Let's ban any activity that can result in a fatal accident.

People commit violent crimes with knives. Let's ban knives.

People commit violent crimes with hammers. Let's ban hammers.

People commit violent crimes with bits of pipe. Let's ban pipe.

People commit violent crimes with rocks. Let's ban rocks.

People commit violent crimes with arrows. Let's ban archery.

People often kill others when they commit arson. Let's ban anything that burns or can be used to start a fire.


my favorite Prince song ever...
 
2013-01-20 12:41:33 AM  
This does make me appreciate guns more, for what it's worth. What's that the point of the day?

Any time gun nuts run around shooting each other, I always have a good laugh. Thanks guns!
 
2013-01-20 12:41:45 AM  
just ban people.

problem solved.
 
2013-01-20 12:42:04 AM  
What Founding Fathers were hoping for:

simcah.files.wordpress.com

What we wound up with:

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-20 12:42:42 AM  

whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?


Guns are the GREAT EQUALIZER. You don't have to be fit, athletic,or well coordinated to badly hurt or kill someone. Why go through all the hassle of say learning how to box and staying in shape when all you need is a twitch of your finger on the trigger.
 
2013-01-20 12:42:47 AM  
Fubini

You are comparing the number of people who were harmed in accidental firearm discharge with the total number of motor vehicle collisions. It would be more appropriate to compare the number of people harmed in an accidental firearm discharge with the number of people injured in motor vehicle collisions? Pace your final claim that your assumptions were reasonable, that one most certainly is not. Additionally, you'd have to factor in the survivability of being harmed in a motor vehicle collision for any comparison to truly be valid in the manner you're aiming for.
 
2013-01-20 12:42:56 AM  

Doc Daneeka: Three more responsible gun owners heard from!

On Gun Appreciation Day, no less!


And the shotgun guy was selling his, and I bet he wasn't a registered gun dealer, so he didn't have to perform a background check on whoever wanted to buy it.

/But no, there's no such thing as a "gun show loophole".
 
2013-01-20 12:43:33 AM  
So, Sunday has now been declared Emergency Room Appreciation Day.
 
2013-01-20 12:45:35 AM  

Fubini: Kome: Most sci-fi conventions have apparently stricter security and preventative policies in place, and they only have attendees who show up with fake weapons.

Yeah- they should totally prevent people from bringing weapons to gun shows. That'll solve everything.


It's not the gun that's the problem.

Ammunition unsafely stored (for example, inside a gun) has a high risk of combusting, with the potential to kill bystanders. If you had an explosives convention they would make sure there are no open flames in the area. Apparently gun shows are incapable of this.
 
2013-01-20 12:45:36 AM  

Fubini: Kome: Most sci-fi conventions have apparently stricter security and preventative policies in place, and they only have attendees who show up with fake weapons.

Yeah- they should totally prevent people from bringing weapons to gun shows. That'll solve everything.


How you got that from my comment I'll never know. I was merely pointing out that there exist a set of policies and guidelines for the safe carrying of weapons at sci-fi conventions, even though they are fake weapons. The rational extrapolation from that is not "prohibit guns at gun shows" but "why not see if we can incorporate some of those kinds of safety policies for locations that have real weapons".
 
2013-01-20 12:45:39 AM  

Uranus Is Huge!: What Founding Fathers were hoping for:

[simcah.files.wordpress.com image 694x860]

What we wound up with:

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 477x316]


a racist asstralian?
 
2013-01-20 12:46:09 AM  

IlGreven: Doc Daneeka: Three more responsible gun owners heard from!

On Gun Appreciation Day, no less!

And the shotgun guy was selling his, and I bet he wasn't a registered gun dealer, so he didn't have to perform a background check on whoever wanted to buy it.

/But no, there's no such thing as a "gun show loophole".


Yes because you can do that outside of a gun show. If you felt the need to buy my Remington 870 in my home state, I could sell it to you with nary a check just about anywhere you wanted outside of courthouses, school, and a few other places. Calling it a gun show exception is like saying there's a free way exception to driving.
 
2013-01-20 12:46:55 AM  

Fubini: Kome: Most sci-fi conventions have apparently stricter security and preventative policies in place, and they only have attendees who show up with fake weapons.

Yeah- they should totally prevent people from bringing weapons to gun shows. That'll solve everything.


Oh I don't think it's necessary to go overboard, just start with the unloaded ones. Baby steps.
 
2013-01-20 12:48:08 AM  
It might be helpful to know how many guns shows there were today vs other days, AND how many people were at those guns shows compared to other days. If there were 3 times as many gun shows attended by 5 times as many people, you start to see why today might be a more negligent (not accidental) day than normal looking at raw numbers.
 
2013-01-20 12:48:28 AM  

Mugato: I think the difference being that there isn't a convention where people get together and show each other how awesome and knowledgeable they are about booze.


Sure there are. Ever heard of Oktoberfest? How about wine tastings?
 
2013-01-20 12:48:30 AM  
i had a "gun show loophole" once....last time i eat a frozen burrito

tish!
 
2013-01-20 12:49:11 AM  

Darth Macho: Ammunition unsafely stored (for example, inside a gun) has a high risk of combusting, with the potential to kill bystanders. If you had an explosives convention they would make sure there are no open flames in the area. Apparently gun shows are incapable of this


Because of two incidents nationwide you've come to this conclusion?
 
2013-01-20 12:49:12 AM  
Hey, has anyone laid down the "Gun violence isn't really a problem because there are other things that kill more people than guns" argument yet?
 
2013-01-20 12:49:37 AM  

IlGreven: Mugato: I think the difference being that there isn't a convention where people get together and show each other how awesome and knowledgeable they are about booze.

Sure there are. Ever heard of Oktoberfest? How about wine tastings?


mugato likes his bubble. don't burst it..
 
2013-01-20 12:49:45 AM  

stoli n coke: It's unrealistic to expect "responsible gun owners" to always make sure their weapon is unloaded before putting it in the case? That's one of the first things covered in safety courses.


No it's not unrealistic. But accidents are still going to happen, just because there are so many gun owners out there. Eighty-million. Does your mind even comprehend how many people that is? If you had a 99.99% accurate test and gave it to 80M people your test would still hand back 8000 wrong test results. The majority of gun owners will go their entire lives without ever accidentally endangering someone, but there are so many of them that it's still going to happen eventually.

I've been a gun owner for two years now and I've never had a gun loaded outside of a range environment, and I've never pointed a loaded gun anywhere other than down that range. But who knows? Maybe one day I'll get stung by a bee and muzzle-sweep a bunch of people because I'm a sissy. I do my best to be safe in every way conceivable (I store my firing pins separately from the guns) but that doesn't mean that I'll never have an accident, because it's always possible that the stars just align and I do something really stupid, intentionally or unintentionally.

We just had a story here on far a few days ago about a cannon that sat with an explosively viable powder charge for decades in New York's Central Park. What's the probability that some idiot never tried to put out his cigarette on that thing? That some joker never threw a firecracker down there? You can always look at an accident and try to cast blame, say it's so-and-so's fault because they didn't do XYZ, but the reality is that there are billions of people on earth, 310 million of them in our country, and sometimes they do something boneheaded despite their darndedest attempts not to.
 
2013-01-20 12:49:49 AM  

rhiannon: Fubini: Kome: Most sci-fi conventions have apparently stricter security and preventative policies in place, and they only have attendees who show up with fake weapons.

Yeah- they should totally prevent people from bringing weapons to gun shows. That'll solve everything.

Oh I don't think it's necessary to go overboard, just start with the unloaded ones. Baby steps.


Think I meant to add a "bringing" in there somewhere.
 
2013-01-20 12:49:55 AM  
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.

Fart_Machine: PaLarkin: So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows? People get hurt at car races. Do you want to ban the Indy 500 because someone might wreck at the next one?

People get hurt at football games. Let's ban football.

People get hurt at wrestling matches. Let's ban wrestling.

Asshats who text while driving cause wrecks. People who drive while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs kill people every day. Let's ban cars.

People get killed all the time in skydiving accidents. Let's ban sky diving.

People get killed in scuba diving accidents. Let's ban scuba diving.

People get killed in boating accidents. Let's ban boating.

People die on the operating table when something goes wrong. Let's ban surgery.

Every day people die in accidents. Let's ban any activity that can result in a fatal accident.

People commit violent crimes with knives. Let's ban knives.

People commit violent crimes with hammers. Let's ban hammers.

People commit violent crimes with bits of pipe. Let's ban pipe.

People commit violent crimes with rocks. Let's ban rocks.

People commit violent crimes with arrows. Let's ban archery.

People often kill others when they commit arson. Let's ban anything that burns or can be used to start a fire.

What's being banned again?

 
2013-01-20 12:50:26 AM  

Darth Macho: Fubini: Kome: Most sci-fi conventions have apparently stricter security and preventative policies in place, and they only have attendees who show up with fake weapons.

Yeah- they should totally prevent people from bringing weapons to gun shows. That'll solve everything.

It's not the gun that's the problem.

Ammunition unsafely stored (for example, inside a gun) has a high risk of combusting, with the potential to kill bystanders. If you had an explosives convention they would make sure there are no open flames in the area. Apparently gun shows are incapable of this.


True but it would be a lot harder to regulate an open flame outside of their area of control. One of our examples is more like what has happened than the other.
 
2013-01-20 12:51:24 AM  
Fart_Machine:

What's being banned again?

I do believe Obama's requested reinstating the Assault Weapons Ban.
 
2013-01-20 12:51:44 AM  

Fubini: We just had a story here on far a few days ago about a cannon that sat with an explosively viable powder charge for decades in New York's Central Park. What's the probability that some idiot never tried to put out his cigarette on that thing? That some joker never threw a firecracker down there?


zero. there was a rusted cannon ball in the way. rain would have got to the powder first..use your head man...unless your a woman..then..carry on

tish!
 
2013-01-20 12:52:10 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-20 12:52:20 AM  
What!? None of these people died?! I thought guns were instant death machines, unlike knives.
 
LKM
2013-01-20 12:52:38 AM  

IlGreven: Mugato: I think the difference being that there isn't a convention where people get together and show each other how awesome and knowledgeable they are about booze.

Sure there are. Ever heard of Oktoberfest? How about wine tastings?


My brewing friends do this all the time.
 
2013-01-20 12:52:40 AM  

PaLarkin: So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows?


It's ironically funny because it happened on Gun Appreciation Day. Is that really hard to understand?
 
fdr
2013-01-20 12:52:51 AM  

eddievercetti: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

To bad some dumbasses forget the advanced technology of a zip tie!


Zip-ties should be mandatory by law. Click Smart if you agree or Funny if you're irresponsible.
 
2013-01-20 12:53:04 AM  

PaLarkin: The gun control crowd wants to ban guns


Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Gun nuts and the NRA cannot talk rationally about the topic though, because even these common-sense measures are greeted with "OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS" and other paranoid bullshiat. They can't be reasoned with.
 
2013-01-20 12:53:18 AM  

PaLarkin: So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows? People get hurt at car races. Do you want to ban the Indy 500 because someone might wreck at the next one?

People get hurt at football games. Let's ban football.

People get hurt at wrestling matches. Let's ban wrestling.

Asshats who text while driving cause wrecks. People who drive while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs kill people every day. Let's ban cars.

People get killed all the time in skydiving accidents. Let's ban sky diving.

People get killed in scuba diving accidents. Let's ban scuba diving.

People get killed in boating accidents. Let's ban boating.

People die on the operating table when something goes wrong. Let's ban surgery.

Every day people die in accidents. Let's ban any activity that can result in a fatal accident.

People commit violent crimes with knives. Let's ban knives.

People commit violent crimes with hammers. Let's ban hammers.

People commit violent crimes with bits of pipe. Let's ban pipe.

People commit violent crimes with rocks. Let's ban rocks.

People commit violent crimes with arrows. Let's ban archery.

People often kill others when they commit arson. Let's ban anything that burns or can be used to start a fire.


Look at all those Eggman's strawmen!
 
2013-01-20 12:53:37 AM  
"your a woman"


lol...send in the clowns
 
2013-01-20 12:54:06 AM  
There have been issues at fireworks stores/stands where people have lit off fireworks near by and caused the whole thing to go up in flames in minutes. I guess that means all fireworks stands everywhere are unsafe and we should close them down.

BTW, I bet there are more fireworks strand mishaps on 7/3 and 7/4 than any other day. I bet you could find a few incidents on the same day across this small, minimally populated country of ours and misleadingly tie them together into a trend that proves fireworks sellers are unsafe.

What about the tens of thousands of people who openly carried guns in nearly every state in the country with nary a single reported negligent discharge?
 
2013-01-20 12:54:14 AM  

Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.


Are you talking about AR-15s and such?
 
2013-01-20 12:54:39 AM  

Somacandra: [i.imgur.com image 541x720]


where the hell did that come from! thats...candy!
 
2013-01-20 12:55:20 AM  

Frank N Stein: Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Are you talking about AR-15s and such?


here we go again...

"that's not an assault rifle duuude..."
 
2013-01-20 12:57:22 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: Frank N Stein: Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Are you talking about AR-15s and such?

here we go again...

"that's not an assault rifle duuude..."


That's not what I'm getting at.
 
2013-01-20 12:57:31 AM  

Amos Quito: My god, what next?

Plane crashes at airshows?


As a resident of Hillsboro, Oregon, that is not even remotely humorous.
 
2013-01-20 12:57:32 AM  

pedrop357: It might be helpful to know how many guns shows there were today vs other days, AND how many people were at those guns shows compared to other days. If there were 3 times as many gun shows attended by 5 times as many people, you start to see why today might be a more negligent (not accidental) day than normal looking at raw numbers.


Would the fact that these are supposed to be people who should know how to handle guns make any difference?
 
2013-01-20 12:58:07 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: Darth Macho: Proof that a time machine will never, ever be invented.

actually, entropy is that very proof.... time as we understand it only works in one direction...


you can have your multiplex of worlds theory or your stringbean theory, but it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that time travel is a human delusion...sorry..deli-sign...

but dude, never bring a time machine to a gun fight...


You're so smart.
 
2013-01-20 12:58:11 AM  

Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.


The latter is really just a more artful and misleading way of saying all guns, since all guns can kill a large number of people in a short amount of time.

It's also worth pointing that no one wants any guns really banned. They want the police and federal law enforcement officers to be the ones able to possess 'extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.' I'm not sure why the police, FBI, etc. should have access to such weaponry if it really exists only to kill a large number of people.
 
2013-01-20 12:58:26 AM  

PaLarkin: So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows? People get hurt at car races. Do you want to ban the Indy 500 because someone might wreck at the next one?

People get hurt at football games. Let's ban football.

People get hurt at wrestling matches. Let's ban wrestling.

Asshats who text while driving cause wrecks. People who drive while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs kill people every day. Let's ban cars.

People get killed all the time in skydiving accidents. Let's ban sky diving.

People get killed in scuba diving accidents. Let's ban scuba diving.

People get killed in boating accidents. Let's ban boating.

People die on the operating table when something goes wrong. Let's ban surgery.

Every day people die in accidents. Let's ban any activity that can result in a fatal accident.

People commit violent crimes with knives. Let's ban knives.

People commit violent crimes with hammers. Let's ban hammers.

People commit violent crimes with bits of pipe. Let's ban pipe.

People commit violent crimes with rocks. Let's ban rocks.

People commit violent crimes with arrows. Let's ban archery.

People often kill others when they commit arson. Let's ban anything that burns or can be used to start a fire.


85% of the children in the world who die from gunshot wounds die here. Let's ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines.
 
2013-01-20 12:58:34 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: Frank N Stein: Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Are you talking about AR-15s and such?

here we go again...

"that's not an assault rifle duuude..."

That's not what I'm getting at.


i know..but that's where it will go..and then some nutter will get in with "VALIDATE THE POSITION!"
 
2013-01-20 12:58:51 AM  
Again, gun people, lighten up a little, you can admit that this is just the tiniest bit funny.

It doesn't mean you are admitting that all guns should be banned. It doesn't mean you are admitting that the NRA is really a Communist organization destined to destroy the USA. It doesn't mean you don't love the Constitution.

But seriously, you have to admit, as far as press goes for Gun Appreciation Day, this is not exactly how you wanted it to play out and it is just slightly humorous.
 
2013-01-20 12:59:05 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: I suppose you libtards would feel better if they'd been stabbed at a knife show!?


Last time I was at a trebuchet show....
 
2013-01-20 12:59:40 AM  

spacelord321: Haliburton Cummings: Darth Macho: Proof that a time machine will never, ever be invented.

actually, entropy is that very proof.... time as we understand it only works in one direction...


you can have your multiplex of worlds theory or your stringbean theory, but it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that time travel is a human delusion...sorry..deli-sign...

but dude, never bring a time machine to a gun fight...

You're so smart.


i tell myself this all the time
 
2013-01-20 12:59:59 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: PaLarkin: So what if a couple of people were shot at a couple of gun shows? People get hurt at car races. Do you want to ban the Indy 500 because someone might wreck at the next one?

People get hurt at football games. Let's ban football.

People get hurt at wrestling matches. Let's ban wrestling.

Asshats who text while driving cause wrecks. People who drive while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs kill people every day. Let's ban cars.

People get killed all the time in skydiving accidents. Let's ban sky diving.

People get killed in scuba diving accidents. Let's ban scuba diving.

People get killed in boating accidents. Let's ban boating.

People die on the operating table when something goes wrong. Let's ban surgery.

Every day people die in accidents. Let's ban any activity that can result in a fatal accident.

People commit violent crimes with knives. Let's ban knives.

People commit violent crimes with hammers. Let's ban hammers.

People commit violent crimes with bits of pipe. Let's ban pipe.

People commit violent crimes with rocks. Let's ban rocks.

People commit violent crimes with arrows. Let's ban archery.

People often kill others when they commit arson. Let's ban anything that burns or can be used to start a fire.

my favorite Prince song ever...


I could kill a human with a toothpick if he stood still long enough. Sometimes, you just have to ask nicely.
 
2013-01-20 01:00:12 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: Frank N Stein: Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Are you talking about AR-15s and such?

here we go again...

"that's not an assault rifle duuude..."

That's not what I'm getting at.


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.
 
2013-01-20 01:00:13 AM  
Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

It kind of needs to be seen to be appreciated. Trust me on this.
 
2013-01-20 01:00:22 AM  
I prefer Firelegs anyway.
 
2013-01-20 01:00:22 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: Frank N Stein: Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Are you talking about AR-15s and such?

here we go again...

"that's not an assault rifle duuude..."

That's not what I'm getting at.

i know..but that's where it will go..and then some nutter will get in with "VALIDATE THE POSITION!"


Well it's an aside, but yeah, civilian AR-15s are not assault rifles. That's just an easily verifiable fact.
 
2013-01-20 01:00:33 AM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Would the fact that these are supposed to be people who should know how to handle guns make any difference?


No.

As the gun control crowd loves to crow, nothing is perfect.

If 2 or 3 times as many people showed up, the number of mistakes was bound to go up too. A large gun show day with more people than normal may see something like this.

If we have a thousand guns shows a month in this country and there's two mistakes on the day with the most gun shows, it's a statistical blip.
 
2013-01-20 01:00:49 AM  

Confabulat: PaLarkin: The gun control crowd wants to ban guns

Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Gun nuts and the NRA cannot talk rationally about the topic though, because even these common-sense measures are greeted with "OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS" and other paranoid bullshiat. They can't be reasoned with.


Please define "kill-em-all weaponry that only exists to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" that are currently legally and readily available to civilians. Describe the specific characteristics of such firearms not present in other firearms. Explain why such firearms should be prohibited entirely, rather than merely restricted so that civilians who demonstrate qualification may be able to possess them while making them less easy to obtain than they are currently.
 
2013-01-20 01:01:14 AM  

Coelacanth: 85% of the children in the world who die from gunshot wounds die here. Let's ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines.


Why, are those things causing all those deaths?
 
2013-01-20 01:01:24 AM  
I only wish this was not too big to post inline, as it pretty much sums up my feelings about this. And I used to love going to gun shows.
 
2013-01-20 01:01:25 AM  
Meanwhile, the rest of the civilised is world is sitting at home, enjoying their stable democracies without the need to bear guns, enjoying their peaceful gun-free homes and lives and low murder rates without the need to bear guns. the fact that suicide rates and accidental death rates from fire arms are lower is also a bonus.

Oh, and we're laughing at you America as the idiots amongst you lose their collective shiat from the fact that they may not have complete access to their fetish objects.
 
2013-01-20 01:01:56 AM  

Somacandra: [i.imgur.com image 541x720]


Okay, where do the pictures of this dude come from? I have no idea who he is, but I've been seeing these pics for years. Did he go nuts and kill a bunch of people, or is it just some dude with an apparent gun fetish, or what's the deal?
 
2013-01-20 01:01:59 AM  

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?
 
2013-01-20 01:02:07 AM  

jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.


Oh, there you go, being all reasonable and stuff. And yes, every gun show i've been to, for the last 4 decades, also insisted on the same.

A paranoid psycho, such as me (apparently), might dare to suggest that maybe, just maybe, this sudden "hasn't happened in decades and happened twice today" activity is, somehow, staged by outsiders.

And by "outsiders" I mean "anti-gun fascists who suddenly have attacked our events to pretend that they are suddenly an actual problem".
 
2013-01-20 01:02:29 AM  

pedrop357: They want the police and federal law enforcement officers to be the ones able to possess 'extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.' I'm not sure why the police, FBI, etc. should have access to such weaponry if it really exists only to kill a large number of people.


Because we as a society have, for better or worse, entrusted those people to keep order. They are not Joe Six-Pack shooting up his back yard.
 
2013-01-20 01:02:32 AM  

quickdraw: Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

It kind of needs to be seen to be appreciated. Trust me on this.


If I tried my drinking game there, I'd die of alcohol poisoning in the 1st 50 posts.
 
2013-01-20 01:02:45 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fortunately, we only lost 219 people today as the price we pay for the freedom to drink alcohol.

eagerly awaiting the typical "THAT'S DIFFERENT!" response from the alcoholics.


No, it's a different discussion. The fallacy you've just been using is called tu-quoque, and it's called 'fallacy' for a reason.
 
2013-01-20 01:03:04 AM  

Somacandra: I only wish this was not too big to post inline, as it pretty much sums up my feelings about this. And I used to love going to gun shows.


what was the final score on that?
 
2013-01-20 01:03:16 AM  

Dimensio: Please define "kill-em-all weaponry that only exists to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" that are currently legally and readily available to civilians. Describe the specific characteristics of such firearms not present in other firearms.


To be fair, that is precisely what the old 'assault-weapons ban' did. It spent a lot of ink and paper doing just that.
 
2013-01-20 01:03:44 AM  

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.
 
2013-01-20 01:04:18 AM  

djh0101010: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

Oh, there you go, being all reasonable and stuff. And yes, every gun show i've been to, for the last 4 decades, also insisted on the same.

A paranoid psycho, such as me (apparently), might dare to suggest that maybe, just maybe, this sudden "hasn't happened in decades and happened twice today" activity is, somehow, staged by outsiders.

And by "outsiders" I mean "anti-gun fascists who suddenly have attacked our events to pretend that they are suddenly an actual problem".


your tinfoil...it's loose
 
2013-01-20 01:04:24 AM  

Somacandra: Dimensio: Please define "kill-em-all weaponry that only exists to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" that are currently legally and readily available to civilians. Describe the specific characteristics of such firearms not present in other firearms.

To be fair, that is precisely what the old 'assault-weapons ban' did. It spent a lot of ink and paper doing just that.


It saved our nation from the scourge of drive by bayonetings
 
2013-01-20 01:04:41 AM  

djh0101010: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

Oh, there you go, being all reasonable and stuff. And yes, every gun show i've been to, for the last 4 decades, also insisted on the same.

A paranoid psycho, such as me (apparently), might dare to suggest that maybe, just maybe, this sudden "hasn't happened in decades and happened twice today" activity is, somehow, staged by outsiders.

And by "outsiders" I mean "anti-gun fascists who suddenly have attacked our events to pretend that they are suddenly an actual problem".


Yes. The gun dealer who shot his longtime friend with a handgun is clearly an outsider, derpy.
 
2013-01-20 01:04:48 AM  
God is just punking us now.
 
2013-01-20 01:04:50 AM  

Dimensio: Please define "kill-em-all weaponry that only exists to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" that are currently legally and readily available to civilians. Describe the specific characteristics of such firearms not present in other firearms. Explain why such firearms should be prohibited entirely, rather than merely restricted so that civilians who demonstrate qualification may be able to possess them while making them less easy to obtain than they are currently.


As I said before, I'm pretty ignorant about guns, due to my normal sized penis.

I understand hunting rifles, shotguns, and small handguns.

And that's the ONLY weaponry I should ever need to know about.

Why do you need anything more? Be very specific. What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?
 
2013-01-20 01:04:55 AM  

Confabulat: Gun nuts and the NRA cannot talk rationally about the topic though, because even these common-sense measures are greeted with "OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS" and other paranoid bullshiat. They can't be reasoned with.


As you opposed to you overly emotional gun control nuts? You deal entirely in flash, looks, feelings, and good intentions. Your side rejects any sense of perspective, logic, rationality, history, or long term vision. YOU are the impossible ones to reason with.
 
2013-01-20 01:05:08 AM  

pedrop357: Confabulat: Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

The latter is really just a more artful and misleading way of saying all guns, since all guns can kill a large number of people in a short amount of time.


No, you can keep the muskets the founding fathers wanted you to have.

It's also worth pointing that no one wants any guns really banned. They want the police and federal law enforcement officers to be the ones able to possess 'extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.' I'm not sure why the police, FBI, etc. should have access to such weaponry if it really exists only to kill a large number of people.


I can't imagine why, either.
 
2013-01-20 01:05:37 AM  

Alonjar: You have a 0.0036% chance of being killed by a firearm, not counting intentional suicide.

SHUT. DOWN. EVERYTHING.


As opposed to unintentional suicide?
 
2013-01-20 01:05:43 AM  

Somacandra: To be fair, that is precisely what the old 'assault-weapons ban' did. It spent a lot of ink and paper doing just that.


No, it banned scary looking guns and had no effect on crime.
 
2013-01-20 01:05:52 AM  

Somacandra: Dimensio: Please define "kill-em-all weaponry that only exists to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" that are currently legally and readily available to civilians. Describe the specific characteristics of such firearms not present in other firearms.

To be fair, that is precisely what the old 'assault-weapons ban' did. It spent a lot of ink and paper doing just that.


I am aware that the now-expired federal "assault weapons ban" defined characteristics, but I was not aware that the defined characteristics in any way transformed otherwise functionally identical firearms into "kill-em-all weaponry that only exists to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time". I do not understand why a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring a pistol grip and a collapsing buttstock would qualify as such a firearm while a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring only a pistol grip and a fixed buttstock would not.
 
2013-01-20 01:06:12 AM  

Confabulat: As I said before, I'm pretty ignorant about guns,

due to my normal sized penis.

And if you say it a few more times, you just might convince yourself it's true.
 
2013-01-20 01:06:28 AM  

pedrop357: There have been issues at fireworks stores/stands where people have lit off fireworks near by and caused the whole thing to go up in flames in minutes. I guess that means all fireworks stands everywhere are unsafe and we should close them down.

BTW, I bet there are more fireworks strand mishaps on 7/3 and 7/4 than any other day. I bet you could find a few incidents on the same day across this small, minimally populated country of ours and misleadingly tie them together into a trend that proves fireworks sellers are unsafe.

What about the tens of thousands of people who openly carried guns in nearly every state in the country with nary a single reported negligent discharge?


So your argument is that the American firearms society is, at best, equivalent in civicminded virtue and sound judgement as a hastily-erected illegal roadside fireworks kiosk. That's some damning praise.

This was the one day gun rights supporters had to show the nation its best and brightest, a rare moment to present the safer side of responsible ownership. And they shot themselves in the foot (and arm, hand and torso).

It's like the KKK holding a minority tolerance day and still having members say the N-word on camera. Comical evidence that the problem runs a little deeper than surface PR.
 
2013-01-20 01:06:41 AM  

Confabulat: Why do you need anything more? Be very specific. What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?


DRiNK!

Why should we be denied anything more? Please be very specific.
 
2013-01-20 01:07:26 AM  

quickdraw: Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

It kind of needs to be seen to be appreciated. Trust me on this.


jehovahs witness protection [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:35:18 PM

Every penis show I ever attended required all genitals to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

/that's some funny shiat right there
 
2013-01-20 01:08:03 AM  

Dimensio: I do not understand why a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring a pistol grip and a collapsing buttstock would qualify as such a firearm while a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring only a pistol grip and a fixed buttstock would not.


mmmmmm guntard dirty talk....

lemme get the lotion and you prep your next long winded post about gun minutiae....
 
2013-01-20 01:08:19 AM  

pedrop357: Confabulat: Why do you need anything more? Be very specific. What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?

DRiNK!

Why should we be denied anything more? Please be very specific.


Because you live in an otherwise civilized world.
 
2013-01-20 01:08:19 AM  

derpy: quickdraw: Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

It kind of needs to be seen to be appreciated. Trust me on this.

jehovahs witness protection [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:35:18 PM

Every penis show I ever attended required all genitals to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

/that's some funny shiat right there


Haha. I accidentally green arrowed you.
 
2013-01-20 01:09:01 AM  

HairBolus: whatshisname: Is there one person in line for that gun show who isn't morbidly obese?

Guns are the GREAT EQUALIZER. You don't have to be fit, athletic,or well coordinated to badly hurt or kill someone. Why go through all the hassle of say learning how to box and staying in shape when all you need is a twitch of your finger on the trigger.


Because you're too young, old, have a disability, or you realize a criminal with a gun can easily put a fit boxer in the grave. Don't confuse other peoples circumstances with your own.
 
2013-01-20 01:09:03 AM  

Confabulat: Dimensio: Please define "kill-em-all weaponry that only exists to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time" that are currently legally and readily available to civilians. Describe the specific characteristics of such firearms not present in other firearms. Explain why such firearms should be prohibited entirely, rather than merely restricted so that civilians who demonstrate qualification may be able to possess them while making them less easy to obtain than they are currently.

As I said before, I'm pretty ignorant about guns, due to my normal sized penis.


Your penis is of absolutely no relevance to the current discussion. I do not understand why you felt a compulsion to make reference to it, but your mention of your genitalia is entirely inappropriate.

I understand hunting rifles, shotguns, and small handguns.

And that's the ONLY weaponry I should ever need to know about.

Why do you need anything more? Be very specific.


You did not address my question.

What characteristics, specifically, differentiate a "hunting rifle", "shotgun" or "small handgun" from "kill-em-all weaponry"? Additionally, for what reason do you omit target rifles, used for recreational target shooting, from the list that you have stated?


What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?

Penis size is of absolutely no relevance, and your continued reference to male genitalia suggests a psychological obsession for which you may wish to seek counseling.
 
2013-01-20 01:09:23 AM  

Darth Macho: pedrop357: There have been issues at fireworks stores/stands where people have lit off fireworks near by and caused the whole thing to go up in flames in minutes. I guess that means all fireworks stands everywhere are unsafe and we should close them down.

BTW, I bet there are more fireworks strand mishaps on 7/3 and 7/4 than any other day. I bet you could find a few incidents on the same day across this small, minimally populated country of ours and misleadingly tie them together into a trend that proves fireworks sellers are unsafe.

What about the tens of thousands of people who openly carried guns in nearly every state in the country with nary a single reported negligent discharge?

So your argument is that the American firearms society is, at best, equivalent in civicminded virtue and sound judgement as a hastily-erected illegal roadside fireworks kiosk. That's some damning praise.

This was the one day gun rights supporters had to show the nation its best and brightest, a rare moment to present the safer side of responsible ownership. And they shot themselves in the foot (and arm, hand and torso).

It's like the KKK holding a minority tolerance day and still having members say the N-word on camera. Comical evidence that the problem runs a little deeper than surface PR.


No, moron. I'm pointing out that on the most armed, publicly carrying day on record and there were two accidents reported anywhere.

The hundreds of thousands of gun rights supporters who came out today are not responsible for the dumb behavior of 2 people.
 
2013-01-20 01:09:52 AM  

ansius: Meanwhile, the rest of the civilised is world is sitting at home, enjoying their stable democracies without the need to bear guns, enjoying their peaceful gun-free homes and lives and low murder rates without the need to bear guns. the fact that suicide rates and accidental death rates from fire arms are lower is also a bonus.

Oh, and we're laughing at you America as the idiots amongst you lose their collective shiat from the fact that they may not have complete access to their fetish objects.


Oh man, the cool kids don't like my jeans. Oh noes.
 
2013-01-20 01:10:05 AM  

Kome: Fubini

You are comparing the number of people who were harmed in accidental firearm discharge with the total number of motor vehicle collisions. It would be more appropriate to compare the number of people harmed in an accidental firearm discharge with the number of people injured in motor vehicle collisions? Pace your final claim that your assumptions were reasonable, that one most certainly is not. Additionally, you'd have to factor in the survivability of being harmed in a motor vehicle collision for any comparison to truly be valid in the manner you're aiming for.


I acknowledge each of those points in my post, actually. The census document I cite can be found here, if you want to see for yourself. It's unfortunate that the census data doesn't specifically say whether they're talking about all accidents or only those that result in hospitalizations. They might be estimating all accidents, because certainly there's no way to track them all as there are so many totally negligable accidents that don't seriously hurt anyone.

I made my assumptions to try and most accurately compare accidental injuries vs accidental injuries. But, I would really like to address the points you make above, so instead of comparing injuries versus injuries we can definitely compare deaths versus deaths, because deaths are much more heavily tracked than just injuries.

According to mortality data, roughly 500 people died from firearms accidents in 2009, while there were 35,900 deaths from traffic accidents. We use the same numbers for gun-use-hours and car-use-hours as above, and get the following.

Between a 0.00000012 and 0.00000052 chance of killing yourself or someone else per gun-use-hour, and 0.00000012 chance of a traffic fatality per car-use-hour.

Thus, if you only look at fatality data, guns are somewhere between exactly as dangerous as cars to 4.3 times more dangerous than cars per hour of use. But, recall to get that 4.3 times more dangerous per hour of use I had to assume that all gun owners in America only use their guns for one hour per month. I'll let you decide whether you think that's fair.
 
2013-01-20 01:10:14 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: I do not understand why a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring a pistol grip and a collapsing buttstock would qualify as such a firearm while a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring only a pistol grip and a fixed buttstock would not.

mmmmmm guntard dirty talk....

lemme get the lotion and you prep your next long winded post about gun minutiae....


Because knowing wtf you're talking about is a bad thing.
 
2013-01-20 01:10:51 AM  

derpy: Because you live in an otherwise civilized world.


Citation needed.

It's not civilized enough for the police to give up even more powerful and/or capable weapons.
 
2013-01-20 01:11:00 AM  

DoctorCal: derpy: quickdraw: Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

It kind of needs to be seen to be appreciated. Trust me on this.

jehovahs witness protection [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:35:18 PM

Every penis show I ever attended required all genitals to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

/that's some funny shiat right there

Haha. I accidentally green arrowed you.


i49.tinypic.com
Gak.
 
2013-01-20 01:11:22 AM  
Friday, January 18, 2013 | Larry Ward | Gun Appreciation Day
A word of caution for tomorrow:

There is likely to be opposition at the events that you folks took the time to organize and promote whether it be at a gun range, gun show, gun shop or at the state capitals to defend your right to keep and bear arms.

The media is also likely to attend your events.

They will be looking for confrontational sound bites and video clips. Let's not give them any. It is important that we demonstrate to the rest of the country and the world (as the world will be watching) that gun owners and advocates are peaceful, ordinary citizens who love our liberty.

This is our opportunity to shine. We must draw the line in the sand to protect our rights as guaranteed in Our Constitution. Let's do it with class.

Thank you all for your efforts and your support. It truly means the world.

Larry Ward
Ordinary Citizen
2nd Amendment Advocate
 
2013-01-20 01:11:47 AM  

Don't Troll Me Bro!: Okay, where do the pictures of this dude come from? I have no idea who he is, but I've been seeing these pics for years. Did he go nuts and kill a bunch of people, or is it just some dude with an apparent gun fetish, or what's the deal?



i.imgur.com

I gotta tell ya---I don't know. I've seen pics of him in a pretty cool kilt, and some farkers talk about how he knows the pics were a joke. Fair enough----I just like to lighten up the gun threads with the Right to Armed Bears, if you know what I mean. And I think you do.
 
2013-01-20 01:12:45 AM  
I'm not surprised. I mean, if your dick is so small you need to own a gun, I'm guessing you go off prematurely all the time.
 
2013-01-20 01:13:12 AM  

Dimensio: Penis size is of absolutely no relevance, and your continued reference to male genitalia suggests a psychological obsession for which you may wish to seek counseling.


actually, guntards crave power a they lack because of core psychological problems and most of that stems from sexual dysfunction...go read up.
so they buy lotsa guns..they pose with them...they take pictures of them..they even get on mssg boards and ramble on in great detail about them too.

why?

teennneee weeeenneee

now bend over and validate the position will you?
 
2013-01-20 01:13:20 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: I do not understand why a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring a pistol grip and a collapsing buttstock would qualify as such a firearm while a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring only a pistol grip and a fixed buttstock would not.

mmmmmm guntard dirty talk....

lemme get the lotion and you prep your next long winded post about gun minutiae....

Because knowing wtf you're talking about is a bad thing.


Facts have no place with some people. Scary looking=evil. Anything else is just us trying to bullshiat them with a bunch of smart talk.
 
2013-01-20 01:14:31 AM  
gunappreciationday-psyclone.netdna-ssl.com

/it's real
 
2013-01-20 01:14:32 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: actually, guntards crave power a they lack because of core psychological problems and most of that stems from sexual dysfunction...go read up.
so they buy lotsa guns..they pose with them...they take pictures of them..they even get on mssg boards and ramble on in great detail about them too.

why?

teennneee weeeenneee

now bend over and validate the position will you?



But the gun control nuts who repeatedly talk about penises and penis size don't have a sexual dysfunction?
 
2013-01-20 01:15:15 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: I do not understand why a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring a pistol grip and a collapsing buttstock would qualify as such a firearm while a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring only a pistol grip and a fixed buttstock would not.

mmmmmm guntard dirty talk....

lemme get the lotion and you prep your next long winded post about gun minutiae....

Because knowing wtf you're talking about is a bad thing.


oh please....
 
2013-01-20 01:15:33 AM  

sheep snorter: My favorite is: "The clip is out so there never could still be a bullet in the chamber" BLAM...ricochet... Durrrrr.
then: "I gots to load my weapon as i have just left the building"... BLAM....in the hand

/just about as fun as watching a gun safety instructor pull out the clip and put the gun to his head and watching the brains fall out the other side.


If you say "clip" when you mean "magazine" one more time, my girlfriend is likely to lose her mind. Please stop it. She has a very sexy mind.
 
2013-01-20 01:16:16 AM  

pedrop357: Haliburton Cummings: actually, guntards crave power a they lack because of core psychological problems and most of that stems from sexual dysfunction...go read up.
so they buy lotsa guns..they pose with them...they take pictures of them..they even get on mssg boards and ramble on in great detail about them too.

why?

teennneee weeeenneee

now bend over and validate the position will you?


But the gun control nuts who repeatedly talk about penises and penis size don't have a sexual dysfunction?


i dunno i'm not a gun control nut.
 
2013-01-20 01:16:26 AM  

pedrop357: Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: I do not understand why a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring a pistol grip and a collapsing buttstock would qualify as such a firearm while a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring only a pistol grip and a fixed buttstock would not.

mmmmmm guntard dirty talk....

lemme get the lotion and you prep your next long winded post about gun minutiae....

Because knowing wtf you're talking about is a bad thing.

Facts have no place with some people. Scary looking=evil. Anything else is just us trying to bullshiat them with a bunch of smart talk.


Oh god, not smart talk! Smart talk is evil! College educations are the devil!

Seriously, the reason that characteristics are banned is because it's easier to list 7 or 8 characteristics common to assault rifles than it is to ban each and every specific model.

Any idiot should be able to see that.
 
2013-01-20 01:16:46 AM  

MontanaDave: If you say "clip" when you mean "magazine" one more time, my girlfriend is likely to lose her mind. Please stop it. She has a very sexy mind.


My favorites are 'magazine clip' and 'magazine drum'.
 
2013-01-20 01:16:46 AM  

pedrop357: Confabulat: Gun nuts and the NRA cannot talk rationally about the topic though, because even these common-sense measures are greeted with "OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS" and other paranoid bullshiat. They can't be reasoned with.

As you opposed to you overly emotional gun control nuts? You deal entirely in flash, looks, feelings, and good intentions. Your side rejects any sense of perspective, logic, rationality, history, or long term vision. YOU are the impossible ones to reason with.


I'm not a gun control nut. I'm hugely in favor of the Second Amendment. I think it's reasonable to have background checks and a ban on certain types of weaponry (no I can't be specific, but I'll leave that to people who can be).

But I absolutely believe guns should be legal.

Why are you nuts so paranoid about common sense?
 
2013-01-20 01:17:03 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: spacelord321: Haliburton Cummings: Darth Macho: Proof that a time machine will never, ever be invented.

actually, entropy is that very proof.... time as we understand it only works in one direction...


you can have your multiplex of worlds theory or your stringbean theory, but it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that time travel is a human delusion...sorry..deli-sign...

but dude, never bring a time machine to a gun fight...

You're so smart.

i tell myself this all the time


So I've seen.
 
2013-01-20 01:17:34 AM  

derpy: quickdraw: Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

It kind of needs to be seen to be appreciated. Trust me on this.

jehovahs witness protection [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:35:18 PM

Every penis show I ever attended required all genitals to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

/that's some funny shiat right there


This is my personal fave

Satan's Dumptruck Driver
 There're a lot of irresponsible penis owners.

There are even more now. People who previously had little interest in shooting and/or firearms are running out to buy penises, thinking that this might be their last opportunity to do so before they are banned. (I am not saying that they will be banned.) I heard some downright scary conversations at the penis range last weekend. And it wasn't a "penis nut" that made it scary. It was someone who had absolutely no knowledge of penises, shooting, penis safety, etc. He even mentioned that penises scared him, but he wanted one "for defense." Salesman suggested that he rent a penis and take a 1-hour class offered by the range before buying. I thought that was logical.

My theory is that if they do ban high-capacity magazines and scary penises the next problem will be penises that are too small and too easy to conceal. So we'll see mass shootings with the assault rifles that are already out there, and more accidental shootings by people with pocket-penises and small penises.
 
2013-01-20 01:17:55 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: I do not understand why a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring a pistol grip and a collapsing buttstock would qualify as such a firearm while a Ruger Mini-14 modified with a synthetic stock featuring only a pistol grip and a fixed buttstock would not.

mmmmmm guntard dirty talk....

lemme get the lotion and you prep your next long winded post about gun minutiae....

Because knowing wtf you're talking about is a bad thing.

oh please....


No, I'm serious. The less people know what they're talking about, the better. So, how much credence do you give to the Evangelist preacher arguing against evolution?
 
2013-01-20 01:18:09 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: teennneee weeeenneee

now bend over and validate the position will you?


But the gun control nuts who repeatedly talk about penises and penis size don't have a sexual dysfunction?

i dunno i'm not a gun control nut.


I disagree, but whatever. Either way, you are penis obsessed unless "teennneee weeeenneee" is talking about something else.
 
2013-01-20 01:18:40 AM  
You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.
 
2013-01-20 01:19:29 AM  

Confabulat: pedrop357: Confabulat: Gun nuts and the NRA cannot talk rationally about the topic though, because even these common-sense measures are greeted with "OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS" and other paranoid bullshiat. They can't be reasoned with.

As you opposed to you overly emotional gun control nuts? You deal entirely in flash, looks, feelings, and good intentions. Your side rejects any sense of perspective, logic, rationality, history, or long term vision. YOU are the impossible ones to reason with.

I'm not a gun control nut. I'm hugely in favor of the Second Amendment. I think it's reasonable to have background checks and a ban on certain types of weaponry (no I can't be specific, but I'll leave that to people who can be).

But I absolutely believe guns should be legal.

Why are you nuts so paranoid about common sense?


Firearm owners who oppose background investigation of prospective firearm transferees are in a minority.

Declaring a ban upon a vaguely described subset of firearms to be "common sense" is inherently an appeal to the "poisoning the well" fallacy.
 
2013-01-20 01:19:41 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Oh god, not smart talk! Smart talk is evil! College educations are the devil!

Seriously, the reason that characteristics are banned is because it's easier to list 7 or 8 characteristics common to assault rifles than it is to ban each and every specific model.

Any idiot should be able to see that.


Only idiots think that banning external features makes any difference in terms of misuse or has any chance of stopping one of the rare mass shootings.

It's the people in here calling gun knowledgeable names for simply relaying facts.
 
2013-01-20 01:19:57 AM  

doglover: jaytkay: Responsible gun owner.

Um, no.

He's pretty much the posterchild of the irresponsible one.


Question: Did he have any gun-related crimes prior to his spree?

Did Jared Loughner?

Did Adam Lanza?

Did any spree killer ever have any criminal red flags that say they should never have been near a gun?

And for those that did not, what are your suggestions for testing them that would have been able to get them successfully away from guns without violating their 2nd and 14th amendment rights if they've never committed a crime?

These are important questions, not to be blown off as trolls. Because, like it or not, most people are depicting any gun owner who's never committed a crime with a gun as a "responsible gun owner", right up until they snap and kill a dozen people, and then they're blown off as "just crazy", and then people ask "how the hell did they get near a gun"?

And many palms slap heads.
 
2013-01-20 01:20:42 AM  

Confabulat: You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.


I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.
 
2013-01-20 01:20:48 AM  

pedrop357: Haliburton Cummings:


But the gun control nuts who repeatedly talk about penises and penis size don't have a sexual dysfunction?


what a "gun control nut" problem family might look like:

"Steve come quick!"
"Linda what happened???"
"Little Tony was playing...by the bookcase...and the dictionary..it went off!"
"QUICK CALL BOOKMOBILE!!!"
"HIDE THE THESAURUS!!"


most rational folks are rational...most gun nuts are yelling screaming emotionally unstable fraidy cats.

cold dead hands etc... they have old queens like Heston come out and shill for them...
 
2013-01-20 01:21:47 AM  

pedrop357: Only idiots think that banning external features makes any difference in terms of misuse or has any chance of stopping one of the rare mass shootings.


Uh, you're not banning the features. You're banning weapons which have those features. New York has had an assault weapons ban for awhile (just strengthened, thank you very much) and do you know how many "mass" shootings we've had since then? One. And it wasn't with an assault rifle. It killed two people.

Seems to me like it's working.
 
2013-01-20 01:22:00 AM  
Before this thread gets out of hand, I'd like to posit a few points for argumentation.
1) The 2nd Amendment says "keep and bear arms". Says nothing about firearms, neither including, nor excluding. So quit limiting your thinking regarding it to guns. It includes knives, shiruken, polearms, grenades (which existed in a crude form in the late 18th century), guided missiles, nuclear warheads and weaponized gas. Basically if the government uses it, the people can, too, if used responsibly.
2) A gun-owner who would negligently discharge his firearm is by definition irresponsible. A gun-owner who would discharge his firearm in a public space and/or near a crowd is criminally negligent and should be banned from possessing (but not necessarily owning) firearms, ever, due to his negligence. It's a tough penalty, but having and enforcing tough penalties will eventually get engrained into the culture and people who want to retain their rights will be very careful about exercising them.
3) The NRA should demonstrate its responsibility by culling from possession the weapons of irresponsible gun-owners so that we don't have to pay for the very expensive task of having the federal or state governments do it. Since the NRA wouldn't have to pay contractors at a rate of about $100k/man-year to do the work, it would be much less expensive for our society to have the NRA do it, and since the NRA doesn't have to pay lawyers to justify their actions (because they're not the evil government, just a private group) they won't have that expense, either. Better yet, if we have more of these gun shows, people can just bring their own firearms, demonstrate their manifest incompetence, and have their weapons purchased from them right there. It's one-stop shopping for disarming the total morons who should never have had a gun.
4) Anyone at those shows who shows up with a Ron Paul, African-Lion-Lying-African, or 2013-End-of-an-Error (with the stylized O logos) automatically fails the test described in point 3.
 
2013-01-20 01:22:05 AM  

Dimensio: I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.


This.
 
2013-01-20 01:22:21 AM  

quickdraw: Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

"sounds like it was in the process of being ziptied so the penis won't come alive by itself and murder people like it's supposed to do"

 
2013-01-20 01:23:01 AM  

Dimensio: Confabulat: You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.

I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.


Seems to me that New York has defined it pretty well. Not sure what that has to do with background checks, though.
 
2013-01-20 01:23:28 AM  

quickdraw: derpy: quickdraw: Thanks to The Voice Of Doom This magical link will allow you to read this thread only with the word "gun" changed to "penis" and "weapon" to "genital."

It kind of needs to be seen to be appreciated. Trust me on this.

jehovahs witness protection [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:35:18 PM

Every penis show I ever attended required all genitals to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

/that's some funny shiat right there

This is my personal fave

Satan's Dumptruck Driver
 There're a lot of irresponsible penis owners.

There are even more now. People who previously had little interest in shooting and/or firearms are running out to buy penises, thinking that this might be their last opportunity to do so before they are banned. (I am not saying that they will be banned.) I heard some downright scary conversations at the penis range last weekend. And it wasn't a "penis nut" that made it scary. It was someone who had absolutely no knowledge of penises, shooting, penis safety, etc. He even mentioned that penises scared him, but he wanted one "for defense." Salesman suggested that he rent a penis and take a 1-hour class offered by the range before buying. I thought that was logical.

My theory is that if they do ban high-capacity magazines and scary penises the next problem will be penises that are too small and too easy to conceal. So we'll see mass shootings with the assault rifles that are already out there, and more accidental shootings by people with pocket-penises and small penises.


I like yours, but it lacks genitals.
 
2013-01-20 01:24:35 AM  

Dimensio: I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.


My penis is never irrelevant. And you're right, I'm ignorant on the topic, because I've gone my whole damn life and never needed any sort of assault weaponry.

Go figure. So why is so important to you? Be specific. I understand having hunting rifles, a shotgun, and a small personal firearm. Perfectly logical.

Why in God's green earth have you ever needed more?
 
2013-01-20 01:25:26 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Friday, January 18, 2013 | Larry Ward | Gun Appreciation Day
A word of caution for tomorrow:

There is likely to be opposition at the events that you folks took the time to organize and promote whether it be at a gun range, gun show, gun shop or at the state capitals to defend your right to keep and bear arms.

The media is also likely to attend your events.

They will be looking for confrontational sound bites and video clips. Let's not give them any. It is important that we demonstrate to the rest of the country and the world (as the world will be watching) that gun owners and advocates are peaceful, ordinary citizens who love our liberty.

This is our opportunity to shine. We must draw the line in the sand to protect our rights as guaranteed in Our Constitution. Let's do it with class.

Thank you all for your efforts and your support. It truly means the world.

Larry Ward
Ordinary Citizen
2nd Amendment Advocate


Wait a ssecond...this makes some sense! A responsible group advocating responsible gun ownership at a gun show...I like it. Really...could this happen?
 
2013-01-20 01:25:45 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Uh, you're not banning the features. You're banning weapons which have those features. New York has had an assault weapons ban for awhile (just strengthened, thank you very much) and do you know how many "mass" shootings we've had since then? One. And it wasn't with an assault rifle. It killed two people.

Seems to me like it's working.


WOW, it worked so well that it affected New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Rhode Island, Maryland, West Virgina and Ohio as none of them had massacres with scary looking semi-auto rifles either.

CT had a ban almost identical to the NY ban and we see how effective it was.
 
LKM
2013-01-20 01:26:09 AM  

djh0101010: jehovahs witness protection: Every gun show I ever attended required all weapons to have zip-ties run through them to keep the bolt open.

Oh, there you go, being all reasonable and stuff. And yes, every gun show i've been to, for the last 4 decades, also insisted on the same.

A paranoid psycho, such as me (apparently), might dare to suggest that maybe, just maybe, this sudden "hasn't happened in decades and happened twice today" activity is, somehow, staged by outsiders.

And by "outsiders" I mean "anti-gun fascists who suddenly have attacked our events to pretend that they are suddenly an actual problem".


Keepin' FARK real. This is why I come here. The pointing and laughing.
 
2013-01-20 01:26:10 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: Confabulat: You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.

I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

Seems to me that New York has defined it pretty well. Not sure what that has to do with background checks, though.


I am certain, then, that you will be able to demonstrate that a Ruger Mini-14 that does not qualify as an "assault weapon" by New York state law is a legitimate civilian firearm, while a Ruger Mini-14 equipped with a stock that features a pistol grip is a "kill-em-all weapon" suitable only for "killing as many folks as possible as quickly as possible". Please do so.
 
2013-01-20 01:26:24 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Uh, you're not banning the features. You're banning weapons which have those features. New York has had an assault weapons ban for awhile (just strengthened, thank you very much) and do you know how many "mass" shootings we've had since then? One. And it wasn't with an assault rifle. It killed two people.


Do you know how many mass shootings you should be expecting? The fact that you have or haven't had shootings is less relevant than the number of shootings you should have had versus the number you did have.

I'll give you a hint: mass shootings are pretty rare. As a country, we have on the order of one or two random spree-type killings per year, on average. The fact that you've had even one probably puts you ahead of the curve compared to a lot of other states. But you'd also have to control for population and things, and I'm not going to think about it that much.
 
2013-01-20 01:26:28 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: pedrop357: Haliburton Cummings:


But the gun control nuts who repeatedly talk about penises and penis size don't have a sexual dysfunction?

what a "gun control nut" problem family might look like:

"Steve come quick!"
"Linda what happened???"
"Little Tony was playing...by the bookcase...and the dictionary..it went off!"
"QUICK CALL BOOKMOBILE!!!"
"HIDE THE THESAURUS!!"


most rational folks are rational...most gun nuts are yelling screaming emotionally unstable fraidy cats.

cold dead hands etc... they have old queens like Heston come out and shill for them...


I grew up in a house in which I had access to a shotgun and shells. I somehow avoided blowing my head off. It's not that hard to teach a kid gun safety.
 
2013-01-20 01:28:17 AM  

pedrop357: cameroncrazy1984: Uh, you're not banning the features. You're banning weapons which have those features. New York has had an assault weapons ban for awhile (just strengthened, thank you very much) and do you know how many "mass" shootings we've had since then? One. And it wasn't with an assault rifle. It killed two people.

Seems to me like it's working.

WOW, it worked so well that it affected New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Rhode Island, Maryland, West Virgina and Ohio as none of them had massacres with scary looking semi-auto rifles either.

CT had a ban almost identical to the NY ban and we see how effective it was.


Maybe it would be more effective at the Federal level. At any rate, you're never going to completely eliminate mass-shootings, but you can damn well cut them down and make them less deadly over time. No solution is going to be immediate. But any solution will be better than the status quo.
 
2013-01-20 01:28:21 AM  

The Short Bald Guy from Benny Hill: Again, I'm not in favor of taking away everyone's guns. There is no reason to be scared of me. I accepted the fact that guns will always be a part of our society long ago. But to say they pose no risk, "Absolutely none", is just ridiculous and makes me not want to believe anything else you say. It's as if admitting that guns have a risk, even to the most responsible gun owner, is somehow admitting defeat. It's not. It's being realistic. Ya, maybe that risk isn't very high for most gun owners. But you said "Absolutely none", which means zero to me, and that tells me you can't be honest about it.

I repeat, I am not in favor of taking your guns away.


...if he's going to be as irresponsible as to say guns pose "absolutely no threat", then I am in favor of taking his guns away. But only his.
 
2013-01-20 01:28:54 AM  

Dimensio: cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: Confabulat: You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.

I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

Seems to me that New York has defined it pretty well. Not sure what that has to do with background checks, though.

I am certain, then, that you will be able to demonstrate that a Ruger Mini-14 that does not qualify as an "assault weapon" by New York state law is a legitimate civilian firearm, while a Ruger Mini-14 equipped with a stock that features a pistol grip is a "kill-em-all weapon" suitable only for "killing as many folks as possible as quickly as possible". Please do so.


Well considering that I've never said those things, no, I won't.
 
2013-01-20 01:29:43 AM  

Confabulat: Why in God's green earth have you ever needed more?


Why not? You're the one that wants to ban them. You gotta come up with a more compelling argument than "but you don't NEED it".

And before you repeat the "kill-em-all weapon suitable only for killing as many folks as possible as quickly as possible" line, think about why police have them, and how "killing as many folks as possible as quickly as possible" is not in a police officer's job description.
 
2013-01-20 01:29:54 AM  

Allen. The end.: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Friday, January 18, 2013 | Larry Ward | Gun Appreciation Day
A word of caution for tomorrow:

There is likely to be opposition at the events that you folks took the time to organize and promote whether it be at a gun range, gun show, gun shop or at the state capitals to defend your right to keep and bear arms.

The media is also likely to attend your events.

They will be looking for confrontational sound bites and video clips. Let's not give them any. It is important that we demonstrate to the rest of the country and the world (as the world will be watching) that gun owners and advocates are peaceful, ordinary citizens who love our liberty.

This is our opportunity to shine. We must draw the line in the sand to protect our rights as guaranteed in Our Constitution. Let's do it with class.

Thank you all for your efforts and your support. It truly means the world.

Larry Ward
Ordinary Citizen
2nd Amendment Advocate

Wait a ssecond...this makes some sense! A responsible group advocating responsible gun ownership at a gun show...I like it. Really...could this happen?


It was their opportunity to shine and they did it with class.
 
2013-01-20 01:29:58 AM  

Confabulat: Dimensio: I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

My penis is never irrelevant. And you're right, I'm ignorant on the topic, because I've gone my whole damn life and never needed any sort of assault weaponry.

Go figure. So why is so important to you? Be specific. I understand having hunting rifles, a shotgun, and a small personal firearm. Perfectly logical.

Why in God's green earth have you ever needed more?


For what reason do you omit target shooting rifles? If you cannot define the characteristics of "kill-em-all weaponry", then by what means will you determine that a given firearm qualifies as "kill-em-all weaponry"? My AR-15 rifle could be used for hunting and in fact some hunters do use AR-15 pattern rifles, however I do not hunt at all and I use the rifle only for target shooting; should it be confiscated from me?

Currently, civilians may purchase fully automatic firearms, however these firearms are federally restricted and require federal permission to obtain. Thus far, since 1934, a total of two homicides have been committed with such firearms. As an automatic rifle does not qualify as a "hunting rifle", do you advocate entirely prohibiting civilian ownership of it, or do you believe that current regulation of such firearms is adequate?
 
2013-01-20 01:30:04 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: "if only they had more choices than Pepsi and Coke because they really are both sugared water..."


We do. We have ROYAL CROWN!

ROYAL CROWN
R(EVOL)UTION
 
2013-01-20 01:31:12 AM  

Confabulat: PaLarkin: The gun control crowd wants to ban guns

Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Gun nuts and the NRA cannot talk rationally about the topic though, because even these common-sense measures are greeted with "OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS" and other paranoid bullshiat. They can't be reasoned with.


The anti gun control crowd knows that this so called reasonable gun control is just a step on the road to a total ban of guns just like the pro abortion crowd knows the slightest regulation or restriction on abortion is a step on the road to banning abortion. So the pro abortion people are just as reluctant to compromise what they perceive as their right to an abortion as the pro gun people are about their right to own guns.

People who oppose being groped and sexually assaulted by the TSA drones don't like the loss of their 4th amendment rights to protection against unreasonable search and seizure.
 
2013-01-20 01:32:19 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: Confabulat: You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.

I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

Seems to me that New York has defined it pretty well. Not sure what that has to do with background checks, though.

I am certain, then, that you will be able to demonstrate that a Ruger Mini-14 that does not qualify as an "assault weapon" by New York state law is a legitimate civilian firearm, while a Ruger Mini-14 equipped with a stock that features a pistol grip is a "kill-em-all weapon" suitable only for "killing as many folks as possible as quickly as possible". Please do so.

Well considering that I've never said those things, no, I won't.


Then your claim that "New York has defined it pretty well" was false. For what reason did you issue the claim?
 
2013-01-20 01:32:31 AM  

PaLarkin: The anti gun control crowd knows that this so called reasonable gun control is just a step on the road to a total ban of gun


So the anti-gun control crowd is into logical fallacies? Neat.
 
2013-01-20 01:32:46 AM  

Confabulat: Dimensio: I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

My penis is never irrelevant. And you're right, I'm ignorant on the topic, because I've gone my whole damn life and never needed any sort of assault weaponry.

Go figure. So why is so important to you? Be specific. I understand having hunting rifles, a shotgun, and a small personal firearm. Perfectly logical.

Why in God's green earth have you ever needed more?


I'll tell you why I need an assault weapon as soon as you acknowledge that they're statistically the safest type of weapon in the US, and this is including all injuries and deaths from all causes, criminal or not. The fact that two lunatics went psycho with them doesn't change that, by the way.

Also, even if you just look at the lunatic psychos, more people are killed/injured with pistols and shotguns than they are with "assault weapons." 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.
 
2013-01-20 01:32:52 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Maybe it would be more effective at the Federal level. At any rate, you're never going to completely eliminate mass-shootings, but you can damn well cut them down and make them less deadly over time. No solution is going to be immediate. But any solution will be better than the status quo.


Why would replicating a failed CT law at the federal law make anyone safer? IT FAILED there. IT FAILED in NY with that felon shooting firefighters.

The cosmetic feature ban has no hope whatsoever of stopping mass shootings. They're exceptionally rare and account for 1% of homicides in any given year.

The ONLY way to make a dent in them would be to ban and confiscate all guns. Even then, mass killings with firearms may not be stopped. Since nothing is free, we could count on more murders, rapes, robberies, home invasions, and beatings.

It's not worth banning all guns to stop mass shootings, and it sure as hell isn't worth banning an arbitrarily defined class of firearms just so we can feel like we're doing something.
 
2013-01-20 01:32:56 AM  

derpy: pedrop357: Confabulat: Why do you need anything more? Be very specific. What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?

DRiNK!

Why should we be denied anything more? Please be very specific.

Because you live in an otherwise civilized world.


You know what other nation claimed to be the civilized world?
 
2013-01-20 01:32:57 AM  

Dimensio: My AR-15 rifle could be used for hunting and in fact some hunters do use AR-15 pattern rifles, however I do not hunt at all and I use the rifle only for target shooting; should it be confiscated from me?


Then they are not hunters. An AR-15 vs. a deer? Even a bear? Come on, what they hell are they hunting, Godzilla?
 
2013-01-20 01:33:31 AM  

Coelacanth:
85% of the children in the world who die from gunshot wounds die here. Let's ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines.


More children die in car crashes and drowning accidents. Ban cars and swimming pools.
 
2013-01-20 01:33:36 AM  

pedrop357: No, moron. I'm pointing out that on the most armed, publicly carrying day on record and there were two accidents reported anywhere.

The hundreds of thousands of gun rights supporters who came out today are not responsible for the dumb behavior of 2 people.


Here's my ultimate point: Yes, they are responsible.

There's a responsibility entrusted in the Second Amendment. You bear Arms and you're expected to come defend the country if attacked. With that right comes the duty to uphold the public safety. THAT is what the Founders intended.

In our world the gun issue has been mishandled by its supporters; they want the gun but they don't want to put in the homework that goes with keeping it. They refuse to be regulated but they also refuse to regulate themselves: they let their lunatics walk openly in their communities and gun stores and don't pass on warnings to authorities. They expect the only precaution against mass murders is the faith that someone else with a gun will kill the killer at the scene. This doesn't work.

Let's be clear: I don't want to take away anyone's guns. But THESE ARE GUNS, the most modern tool of warfare in human history, capable of killing any human with a single bullet. The gun community has shown time and again that their culture lacks a fundamental respect for how their weapons impact our society. I believe the gun community needs to aggressively police itself.

But I'm the 'moron' and the people who didn't know their guns were loaded are the proud and sensible patriots.
 
2013-01-20 01:33:36 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: pedrop357: Haliburton Cummings:


But the gun control nuts who repeatedly talk about penises and penis size don't have a sexual dysfunction?

what a "gun control nut" problem family might look like:

"Steve come quick!"
"Linda what happened???"
"Little Tony was playing...by the bookcase...and the dictionary..it went off!"
"QUICK CALL BOOKMOBILE!!!"
"HIDE THE THESAURUS!!"


most rational folks are rational...most gun nuts are yelling screaming emotionally unstable fraidy cats.

cold dead hands etc... they have old queens like Heston come out and shill for them...

I grew up in a house in which I had access to a shotgun and shells. I somehow avoided blowing my head off. It's not that hard to teach a kid gun safety.


not my point.

good for you.

i have owned and operated legal firearms, never had a problem either. in fact, i know a fair deal about them as well...

but see, the idea that because you stand on a piece of dirt, stolen via genocide and think that entitles every moran on that dirt to own every weapon under the sun is madness..

when they shoot your kids, your tune will change...

but hey, you gun nuts..go start at nabisco, work your way down to exxon and when you are done with your right to depose the despots, lemme know... i'll bake you all a cake.

but right now, it's fat, stupid, scared and entitled american trash with guns...mostly...

go depose your dictators first...the real ones...the people who buy democracy away from you..

the directions to the Remington plant are on google maps...
 
2013-01-20 01:33:43 AM  

Dimensio: cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: Confabulat: You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.

I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

Seems to me that New York has defined it pretty well. Not sure what that has to do with background checks, though.

I am certain, then, that you will be able to demonstrate that a Ruger Mini-14 that does not qualify as an "assault weapon" by New York state law is a legitimate civilian firearm, while a Ruger Mini-14 equipped with a stock that features a pistol grip is a "kill-em-all weapon" suitable only for "killing as many folks as possible as quickly as possible". Please do so.

Well considering that I've never said those things, no, I won't.

Then your claim that "New York has defined it pretty well" was false. For what reason did you issue the claim?


I claimed that New York defined assault rifles pretty well. I did not say anything about them being "kill-em-all" weapons" suitable for "killing as many folks as quickly as possible."

The fact that you must resort to hyperbole does not speak well to your side of the argument.
 
2013-01-20 01:34:05 AM  
I think it's time for us to just hand it over to Darwin and say, 'Darwin, you're going to have to fix this.'
 
2013-01-20 01:34:33 AM  

Fubini: Confabulat: Dimensio: I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

My penis is never irrelevant. And you're right, I'm ignorant on the topic, because I've gone my whole damn life and never needed any sort of assault weaponry.

Go figure. So why is so important to you? Be specific. I understand having hunting rifles, a shotgun, and a small personal firearm. Perfectly logical.

Why in God's green earth have you ever needed more?

I'll tell you why I need an assault weapon as soon as you acknowledge that they're statistically the safest type of weapon in the US, and this is including all injuries and deaths from all causes, criminal or not. The fact that two lunatics went psycho with them doesn't change that, by the way.

Also, even if you just look at the lunatic psychos, more people are killed/injured with pistols and shotguns than they are with "assault weapons." 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.


I take that last bit back, now that I think about it I believe that the Columbine shooters used a Tec-9 pistol that would have been considered an assault weapon.
 
2013-01-20 01:35:43 AM  

Allen. The end.: Then they are not hunters. An AR-15 vs. a deer? Even a bear? Come on, what they hell are they hunting, Godzilla?


*facepalm*

You do realize that .223, the round most commonly chambered for the AR-15, is an intermediate cartridge that is much smaller than the most typical deer hunting caliber, the 30-06, right?
 
2013-01-20 01:36:02 AM  

pedrop357: IT FAILED in NY with that felon shooting firefighters.


The only reason it failed in NY is because he likely didn't buy it in NY. A federal ban would make it much more difficult for someone like him to purchase firearms. Especially now with the increased mental health checks and information.

Or did you not realize that we just tightened the ban in light of that information?

That the law failed does not mean we should have repealed it. It (rightly) meant that we should strengthen it. Again, you cannot stop EVERY mass shooting. But you can curtail them.
 
2013-01-20 01:36:20 AM  

spacelord321: derpy: pedrop357: Confabulat: Why do you need anything more? Be very specific. What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?

DRiNK!

Why should we be denied anything more? Please be very specific.

Because you live in an otherwise civilized world.

You know what other nation claimed to be the civilized world?


I give up. Switzerland?
 
2013-01-20 01:36:33 AM  

redmid17: IlGreven: Doc Daneeka: Three more responsible gun owners heard from!

On Gun Appreciation Day, no less!

And the shotgun guy was selling his, and I bet he wasn't a registered gun dealer, so he didn't have to perform a background check on whoever wanted to buy it.

/But no, there's no such thing as a "gun show loophole".

Yes because you can do that outside of a gun show. If you felt the need to buy my Remington 870 in my home state, I could sell it to you with nary a check just about anywhere you wanted outside of courthouses, school, and a few other places. Calling it a gun show exception is like saying there's a free way exception to driving.


Well, okay then, we'll call it the "non-dealer loophole". And it's still one that needs to be closed. And it can without any infringement on 2nd Amendment rights (Keep and Bear != buy and sell).
 
2013-01-20 01:36:44 AM  

Allen. The end.: Dimensio: My AR-15 rifle could be used for hunting and in fact some hunters do use AR-15 pattern rifles, however I do not hunt at all and I use the rifle only for target shooting; should it be confiscated from me?

Then they are not hunters. An AR-15 vs. a deer? Even a bear? Come on, what they hell are they hunting, Godzilla?


As I never claimed that an AR-15 is a suitable firearm for hunting deer or bears, your reference to such animals is irrelevant. Your claim that hunters who use AR-15 pattern rifles "are not hunters" is an appeal to the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
 
2013-01-20 01:36:54 AM  

Dimensio: Then your claim that "New York has defined it pretty well" was false. For what reason did you issue the claim?


VERHLIDAERT DERP PERSITERNZ!!!!

/runs away mad
 
2013-01-20 01:37:44 AM  

PaLarkin: Coelacanth:
85% of the children in the world who die from gunshot wounds die here. Let's ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

More children die in car crashes and drowning accidents. Ban cars and swimming pools.


It's not about the number; it's about the scale.
 
2013-01-20 01:37:58 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: So the anti-gun control crowd is into logical fallacies? Neat.


really? The people pushing gun control were saying not 6 years ago that the 2nd amendment was not an individual right. These same people repeatedly support laws in the 80s and 90s to ban and confiscate ALL handguns or ALL semi-auto firearms. They supported as reasonable, the bans on handguns and semi-automatic firearms in DC, and the ban on handguns in Chicago.

They created out of thin air, the definition of 'assault weapon' and pretended that the weapons THEY defined with that new term were somehow uniquely worthy of being banned. Since they created that term in the 1980s, they've revised to cover more and more makes/models of guns.

So when someone says that the gun control proposals are simply a 1st step towards full out bans, they're not being hyperbolic.

When a politicians who has pushed for outright bans on abortion now suddenly pushes smaller limits on abortion and calle them 'reasonable', are the pro-choice people wrong for mistrusting his intentions?
 
2013-01-20 01:38:21 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: not my point.

good for you.

i have owned and operated legal firearms, never had a problem either. in fact, i know a fair deal about them as well...

but see, the idea that because you stand on a piece of dirt, stolen via genocide and think that entitles every moran on that dirt to own every weapon under the sun is madness..

when they shoot your kids, your tune will change...

but hey, you gun nuts..go start at nabisco, work your way down to exxon and when you are done with your right to depose the despots, lemme know... i'll bake you all a cake.

but right now, it's fat, stupid, scared and entitled american trash with guns...mostly...

go depose your dictators first...the real ones...the people who buy democracy away from you..

the directions to the Remington plant are on google maps...


What you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
 
2013-01-20 01:39:27 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Friday, January 18, 2013 | Larry Ward | Gun Appreciation Day
A word of caution for tomorrow:

There is likely to be opposition at the events that you folks took the time to organize and promote whether it be at a gun range, gun show, gun shop or at the state capitals to defend your right to keep and bear arms.

The media is also likely to attend your events.

They will be looking for confrontational sound bites and video clips. Let's not give them any. It is important that we demonstrate to the rest of the country and the world (as the world will be watching) that gun owners and advocates are peaceful, ordinary citizens who love our liberty.

This is our opportunity to shine. We must draw the line in the sand to protect our rights as guaranteed in Our Constitution. Let's do it with class.

Thank you all for your efforts and your support. It truly means the world.

Larry Ward
Ordinary Citizen
2nd Amendment Advocate


It's so sad how they're convinced that they're going to lose all of their guns. They're convinced that everyone around them is screaming "NO GUNS NEVER!" and are about to strip them of every firearm they own. And no mater how much you explain otherwise, they just go deeper and deeper into the conspiracy theories and absolution that Obama's only reason for existing is to take away all their guns.
 
2013-01-20 01:39:35 AM  

pedrop357: The people pushing gun control were saying not 6 years ago that the 2nd amendment was not an individual right


Strawman.

pedrop357: These same people repeatedly support laws in the 80s and 90s to ban and confiscate ALL handguns or ALL semi-auto firearms.


Strawman

pedrop357: They created out of thin air, the definition of 'assault weapon' and pretended that the weapons THEY defined with that new term were somehow uniquely worthy of being banned.


Strawman

pedrop357: Since they created that term in the 1980s, they've revised to cover more and more makes/models of guns.


[citation needed]

Yeah, I think you're done here.
 
2013-01-20 01:40:51 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: cameroncrazy1984: Dimensio: Confabulat: You can't even suggest background checks without the gun nuts screaming THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!

I mean, talk about hysterical children.

I believe that the common objections to your statements relate to your advocacy of banning a class of firearms that you cannot actually define and to your continued irrelevant and inappropriate references to your penis.

Seems to me that New York has defined it pretty well. Not sure what that has to do with background checks, though.

I am certain, then, that you will be able to demonstrate that a Ruger Mini-14 that does not qualify as an "assault weapon" by New York state law is a legitimate civilian firearm, while a Ruger Mini-14 equipped with a stock that features a pistol grip is a "kill-em-all weapon" suitable only for "killing as many folks as possible as quickly as possible". Please do so.

Well considering that I've never said those things, no, I won't.

Then your claim that "New York has defined it pretty well" was false. For what reason did you issue the claim?

I claimed that New York defined assault rifles pretty well. I did not say anything about them being "kill-em-all" weapons" suitable for "killing as many folks as quickly as possible."

The fact that you must resort to hyperbole does not speak well to your side of the argument.


Confabulat advocated "a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time". I requested a means of identifying such weaponry, and Confabulat has since admitted an inability to explicitly describe how such a definition may be derived. I then made reference to this inability. You responded to this reference by claiming that "New York has defined it pretty well"; within that context, "it" referred to Confabulat's phrase "extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time". As such, my statement is a direct response to your assertion, and it is not "hyperbole".
 
2013-01-20 01:41:04 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: not my point.

good for you.

i have owned and operated legal firearms, never had a problem either. in fact, i know a fair deal about them as well...

but see, the idea that because you stand on a piece of dirt, stolen via genocide and think that entitles every moran on that dirt to own every weapon under the sun is madness..

when they shoot your kids, your tune will change...

but hey, you gun nuts..go start at nabisco, work your way down to exxon and when you are done with your right to depose the despots, lemme know... i'll bake you all a cake.

but right now, it's fat, stupid, scared and entitled american trash with guns...mostly...

go depose your dictators first...the real ones...the people who buy democracy away from you..

the directions to the Remington plant are on google maps...

What you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


10/10
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...
 
2013-01-20 01:41:22 AM  

IlGreven: redmid17: IlGreven: Doc Daneeka: Three more responsible gun owners heard from!

On Gun Appreciation Day, no less!

And the shotgun guy was selling his, and I bet he wasn't a registered gun dealer, so he didn't have to perform a background check on whoever wanted to buy it.

/But no, there's no such thing as a "gun show loophole".

Yes because you can do that outside of a gun show. If you felt the need to buy my Remington 870 in my home state, I could sell it to you with nary a check just about anywhere you wanted outside of courthouses, school, and a few other places. Calling it a gun show exception is like saying there's a free way exception to driving.

Well, okay then, we'll call it the "non-dealer loophole". And it's still one that needs to be closed. And it can without any infringement on 2nd Amendment rights (Keep and Bear != buy and sell).


Actually keep and bear are pretty much tantamount to buy and sell, but I have few reservations amending that particular part of the codified law if they open up the NICS to private citizens and don't charge for it.
 
2013-01-20 01:42:44 AM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: It's so sad how they're convinced that they're going to lose all of their guns. They're convinced that everyone around them is screaming "NO GUNS NEVER!" and are about to strip them of every firearm they own. And no mater how much you explain otherwise, they just go deeper and deeper into the conspiracy theories and absolution that Obama's only reason for existing is to take away all their guns.


There is plenty of new gun control in the works including a new assault weapons ban, which is supported by Obama. While not every gun owner owns an "assault weapon", they don't want to see them banned because they view it as an affront to the right to keep and bear arms. So yeah, no one is going to take all the guns away, but they do want to take some of the most popular rifles away.
 
2013-01-20 01:42:59 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: At any rate, you're never going to completely eliminate mass-shootings, but you can damn well cut them down and make them less deadly over time. No solution is going to be immediate. But any solution will be better than the status quo.


Please tell me at what level do you consider there to be an acceptable level of mass-shootings? There are well under 50 people killed in mass shootings in an average year. We have, on average, less than two spree-style mass shootings per year.

One shooting every other year? Every three or four years? These things are already incredibly rare. They're so incredibly rare that it defies description how rare it is. I tried to point out in another thread that you're more likely to be killed by lightning than a spree shooter and people called me a liar, I guess because they didn't want to hear it.

But please, give us a specific threshold and a set of reccomendations for that threshold, and we'll have something more concrete to work with than "We think banning assault weapons might cause this to go down in the long run."

Even if some gun control action did have an effect on mass shootings, it wouldn't be measurable because they're already so rare.
 
2013-01-20 01:43:25 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: The only reason it failed in NY is because he likely didn't buy it in NY. A federal ban would make it much more difficult for someone like him to purchase firearms. Especially now with the increased mental health checks and information.

Or did you not realize that we just tightened the ban in light of that information?

That the law failed does not mean we should have repealed it. It (rightly) meant that we should strengthen it. Again, you cannot stop EVERY mass shooting. But you can curtail them.


Get back to me when you know where that gun actually came from. He didn't buy it for starters, someone else illegally bought it for him.

We've seen what strengthening gun control has done in DC, Chicago, Maryland, New Jersey, etc. has done and it's not pretty. We've seen what loosening gun laws has done and it's resulted in a 30-40% drop in murders with handguns since the 1980s.

Tightening stupid laws is still stupid.

Since 1987 some 35 states have changed their concealed carry laws from non issue or discirminatory issue to objective shall issue, meaning more people can legally carry guns today than at just about any point in the last 100 years in this country. We've seen an idiotic, ineffective ban on scary-looking guns come and go, and have seen more people than ever buying guns, and we've seen crime with and without firearms drop like a rock in that time.
 
2013-01-20 01:43:54 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

have at that....
 
2013-01-20 01:44:20 AM  

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 cant even use proper grammar and format your sentences in anyway that makes sense.
 
2013-01-20 01:44:55 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: The people pushing gun control were saying not 6 years ago that the 2nd amendment was not an individual right

Strawman.


pedrop357: These same people repeatedly support laws in the 80s and 90s to ban and confiscate ALL handguns or ALL semi-auto firearms.

Strawman   

pedrop357: They created out of thin air, the definition of 'assault weapon' and pretended that the weapons THEY defined with that new term were somehow uniquely worthy of being banned.

Strawman

pedrop357: Since they created that term in the 1980s, they've revised to cover more and more makes/models of guns.

[citation needed]  http://catalog.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BOOL1=any+of + these&FLD1=ISBN+(ISBN)&DB=local&CNT=25&SAB1=0927291002

Yeah, I think you're done here.
 
2013-01-20 01:45:52 AM  
 
2013-01-20 01:46:03 AM  

PaLarkin: Confabulat: PaLarkin: The gun control crowd wants to ban guns

Only a very extreme fringe wants to ban all guns. Most people are rational and are just considering background checks, or a ban on the extreme kill-em-all weaponry that exists only to kill a large number of folks in a short amount of time.

Gun nuts and the NRA cannot talk rationally about the topic though, because even these common-sense measures are greeted with "OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS" and other paranoid bullshiat. They can't be reasoned with.

The anti gun control crowd knows that this so called reasonable gun control is just a step on the road to a total ban of guns just like the pro abortion crowd knows the slightest regulation or restriction on abortion is a step on the road to banning abortion. So the pro abortion people are just as reluctant to compromise what they perceive as their right to an abortion as the pro gun people are about their right to own guns.

People who oppose being groped and sexually assaulted by the TSA drones don't like the loss of their 4th amendment rights to protection against unreasonable search and seizure.


Conspiracy theories are not a good basis for anything.
 
2013-01-20 01:47:14 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 cant even use proper grammar and format your sentences in anyway that makes sense.


stop trying so hard
 
2013-01-20 01:47:23 AM  
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

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.
 
2013-01-20 01:47:28 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: PaLarkin: Coelacanth:
85% of the children in the world who die from gunshot wounds die here. Let's ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

More children die in car crashes and drowning accidents. Ban cars and swimming pools.

It's not about the number; it's about the scale.


What exactly do you mean by scale? Any given gun is far less likely to end up injuring a child over it's lifetime than any given pool, and in terms of absolute numbers children are injured far less often by guns than either of those things above.

Any random car is more likely to kill a child than any random gun is.
 
2013-01-20 01:48:23 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: The people pushing gun control were saying not 6 years ago that the 2nd amendment was not an individual right

Strawman.

pedrop357: These same people repeatedly support laws in the 80s and 90s to ban and confiscate ALL handguns or ALL semi-auto firearms.

Strawman

pedrop357: They created out of thin air, the definition of 'assault weapon' and pretended that the weapons THEY defined with that new term were somehow uniquely worthy of being banned.

Strawman

pedrop357: Since they created that term in the 1980s, they've revised to cover more and more makes/models of guns.

[citation needed]

Yeah, I think you're done here.


The Brady group, Feinstein, Lautenberg, Schumer, etc. were not claiming that the 2nd amendment was
not individual right?

Dianne Feintstein did not introduce bills to ban and require handguns to be turned over to the government? Other congresspeople did not introduce similar bills in the 1990s?

The Violence Policy Center and 'Handgun Control Inc.' did not simply create the term 'assault weapon' and apply it semi-auto firearms?

Start with CA's 1989 ban on 'assault weapons', then CT's 1993 ban which was copied to the 94 federal ban, then look at CA's 2000 ban, and then finally look at the proposed federal bans they've introduced since 1995. The definition gets broader each time.

I notice you failed to address my claim that they supported the DC handgun and semi-auto ban, or the Chicago handgun ban.
 
2013-01-20 01:49:02 AM  

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.


The problem is "you" want to ban specific models and not the actual technology itself. At best it makes you look ignorant. At worst it means you're doing it just for the political points.
 
2013-01-20 01:49:08 AM  

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 on cigarettes now vs 40 years ago. In the early 70s cigarette advertizing on tv was still legal. What happened to the cigarette industry shows what can happen beginning with just one common sense restriction.
 
2013-01-20 01:49:41 AM  

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.
 
2013-01-20 01:50:27 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.


Of course you mean last year.

extras.mnginteractive.comtimenewsfeed.files.wordpress.comstatic.guim.co.ukwww.gannett-cdn.com
 
2013-01-20 01:50:31 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: stop Stop trying so hard

.

Sorry about your learning disability.
 
2013-01-20 01:50:49 AM  

elchip: I heard five people at three shows.


My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Ferris get shot at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.
 
2013-01-20 01:50:55 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.


Just one more reason I'm glad Nina's worthless ass is on my ignore list.
 
2013-01-20 01:51:07 AM  

redmid17: The problem is "you" want to ban specific models and not the actual technology itself. At best it makes you look ignorant. At worst it means you're doing it just for the political points.


He's desperate for attention. Just leave it alone.
 
2013-01-20 01:51:30 AM  

elchip: I heard five people at three gun shows.


We heard the CT shooter's mother was a teacher at the school too.
 
2013-01-20 01:51:56 AM  

Frank N Stein: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's so sad how they're convinced that they're going to lose all of their guns. They're convinced that everyone around them is screaming "NO GUNS NEVER!" and are about to strip them of every firearm they own. And no mater how much you explain otherwise, they just go deeper and deeper into the conspiracy theories and absolution that Obama's only reason for existing is to take away all their guns.

There is plenty of new gun control in the works including a new assault weapons ban, which is supported by Obama. While not every gun owner owns an "assault weapon", they don't want to see them banned because they view it as an affront to the right to keep and bear arms. So yeah, no one is going to take all the guns away, but they do want to take some of the most popular rifles away.


Still got pistols, handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Plus period guns. Banning one class of weapon =/= THEY TAKE ALL MY GUNS AWAY!, and thinking it's some stepping stone towards a defenseless population and the New World Order is simple conspiracy theory.
 
2013-01-20 01:53:37 AM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Still got pistols, handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Plus period guns. Banning one class of weapon =/= THEY TAKE ALL MY GUNS AWAY!, and thinking it's some stepping stone towards a defenseless population and the New World Order is simple conspiracy theory.


Arbitrarily creating a class of firearms and pretending that they're uniquely worth of being banned, THEN periodically expanding the scope of that definition sure as hell looks like something a person would do if they want to ban all guns.

Also, there are more kinds of infringements than the full out confiscation.
 
2013-01-20 01:53:54 AM  

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.
 
2013-01-20 01:53:56 AM  
these gun threads are getting farking old BM

/yeah. real FARKING old
 
2013-01-20 01:55:19 AM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Frank N Stein: Keizer_Ghidorah: It's so sad how they're convinced that they're going to lose all of their guns. They're convinced that everyone around them is screaming "NO GUNS NEVER!" and are about to strip them of every firearm they own. And no mater how much you explain otherwise, they just go deeper and deeper into the conspiracy theories and absolution that Obama's only reason for existing is to take away all their guns.

There is plenty of new gun control in the works including a new assault weapons ban, which is supported by Obama. While not every gun owner owns an "assault weapon", they don't want to see them banned because they view it as an affront to the right to keep and bear arms. So yeah, no one is going to take all the guns away, but they do want to take some of the most popular rifles away.

Still got pistols, handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Plus period guns. Banning one class of weapon =/= THEY TAKE ALL MY GUNS AWAY!, and thinking it's some stepping stone towards a defenseless population and the New World Order is simple conspiracy theory.


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.
 
2013-01-20 01:55:30 AM  

Frank N Stein: Haliburton Cummings: stop Stop trying so hard.

Sorry about your learning disability.


0/1000
 
2013-01-20 01:57:03 AM  

derpy: spacelord321: derpy: pedrop357: Confabulat: Why do you need anything more? Be very specific. What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?

DRiNK!

Why should we be denied anything more? Please be very specific.

Because you live in an otherwise civilized world.

You know what other nation claimed to be the civilized world?

I give up. Switzerland?


derpy: spacelord321: derpy: pedrop357: Confabulat: Why do you need anything more? Be very specific. What are you needing an arsenal for, other than the penis size issue?

DRiNK!

Why should we be denied anything more? Please be very specific.

Because you live in an otherwise civilized world.

You know what other nation claimed to be the civilized world?

I give up. Switzerland?


Pretty much all of 'em.
 
2013-01-20 01:58:25 AM  
Farkin tab.
 
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.
 
2013-01-20 03:08:08 AM  

pedrop357: 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.


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

So it would be like your skydiver having an accident while packing his 'chute.
 
2013-01-20 03:09:22 AM  

pedrop357: 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.


So, you missed the point about:

*Truckers have different licensing reqs

*As do Motorcyclists

*And the point that with great power, comes great responsibility.

Having built a 1100 horse, ten second, big-block, twin turbo Chevelle, and having driven it quite a bit on the Hot Rod Power Tour, I can say that yep, that's street legal. I can also say that nobody else but a handful of skilled people can drive it.

Secondly, that car is fast. But it's nothing compared to F1. Apples to Oranges. Hate to break it to you, but everything in life isn't just handed to you, there's reasons you have to earn things. And in other cases, laws have been put down because people didn't think.

And yes, if you haven't been schooled in the basics, I'd say you're inexperienced. I wouldn't let you near a pop-gun. Prove it, get licensed. Fail? Too bad, try again. Pass? Go for it.

As Dirty Harry said, a Man's got to know his limitations. If you're not up to snuff, don't whine, grow.
 
2013-01-20 03:15:59 AM  

Confabulat: And these things:


I still have four sets of those, and  you can pry them from my cold, dead hands.

VIVA BUCKEYBALLS!
 
2013-01-20 03:19:01 AM  

Znuh: pedrop357: 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.

So, you missed the point about:

*Truckers have different licensing reqs

*As do Motorcyclists

*And the point that with great power, comes great responsibility.

Having built a 1100 horse, ten second, big-block, twin turbo Chevelle, and having driven it quite a bit on the Hot Rod Power Tour, I can say that yep, that's street legal. I can also say that nobody else but a handful of skilled people can drive it.

Secondly, that car is fast. But it's nothing compared to F1. Apples to Oranges. Hate to break it to you, but everything in life isn't just handed to you, there's reasons you have to earn things. And in other cases, laws have been put down because people didn't think.

And yes, if you haven't been schooled in the basics, I'd say you're inexperienced. I wouldn't let you near a pop-gun. Prove it, get licensed. Fail? Too bad, try again. Pass? Go for it.

As Dirty Harry said, a Man's got to know his limitations. If you're ...


While some guns are harder to control, a rifle firing a .223 isn't one of them. A child could handle the kick from one, and many children do. You haven't been very clear on what you mean by "high performance" in the context of fire arms. Is a Benelli shotgun "high performance"? How about a HiPoint pistol? Is any semi-automatic weapon "high performance"? Or is it an issue of caliber?
 
2013-01-20 03:24:59 AM  

Znuh: 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.


Insanely powerful? Really? I realize that is a subjective ruling but still, what are the grades up from 'insanely powerful'?
 
2013-01-20 03:25:25 AM  

Znuh: So, you missed the point about:

*Truckers have different licensing reqs

*As do Motorcyclists

*And the point that with great power, comes great responsibility.

Having built a 1100 horse, ten second, big-block, twin turbo Chevelle, and having driven it quite a bit on the Hot Rod Power Tour, I can say that yep, that's street legal. I can also say that nobody else but a handful of skilled people can drive it.

Secondly, that car is fast. But it's nothing compared to F1. Apples to Oranges. Hate to break it to you, but everything in life isn't just handed to you, there's reasons you have to earn things. And in other cases, laws have been put down because people didn't think.

And yes, if you haven't been schooled in the basics, I'd say you're inexperienced. I wouldn't let you near a pop-gun. Prove it, get licensed. Fail? Too bad, try again. Pass? Go for it.

As Dirty Harry said, a Man's got to know his limitations. If you're not up to snuff, don't whine, grow.



So you're not just a moron, you're a cliche spewing moron.

Yes, there ARE separate licensing requirements for vehicles over a certain weight rating, length, or relating to the weight and length of a towed trailer.

BUT, a person can drive any vehicle in that length/weight class, power and acceleration are not a factor.

This is the same with standard (Class C in my state) driver licensing. A person who learns to drive in a corolla can drive any car they want in that class, and boy is that class varied. From smart cars to challenger SRTs, Subaru STis, to Full size F350s, Tahoes, Wranglers, anything under 26000lb and they can tow anything under 10,000lb.

M endorsement lets you drive all motorcycles, from the a 35 HP POS to some 400HP 8 second monstrosity

I'll ask my question again: DO YOU HAVE ANY PROOF THAT PEOPLE ARE BUYING BIGGER/MORE POWERFUL GUNS THAN THEY CAN HANDLE?