Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Bill Clinton to Democrats: Don't trivialize gun culture   (politico.com) divider line 1115
    More: Advice, Bill Clinton, gun culture, Democrats, GOP House  
•       •       •

16583 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jan 2013 at 5:41 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1115 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-20 06:49:12 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: I'm just mocking people like you.


So you're trolling but somehow complaining the other side isn't arguing in good faith.
 
2013-01-20 06:50:52 PM  

GUTSU: Keizer_Ghidorah: Amos Quito: gimmegimme: Looking at an unloaded machine gun isn't scary. Walking into a Wal-Mart and seeing some random wingnut packing an assault rifle IS scary.

[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Only because you're not used to it,

The crucial difference, my friend, is that those women were smart enough to remove the magazine, unlike the man in the earlier picture.

I think the biggest problem is that they have AR-15s. I mean really? look at all that shiatty plastic, now if they had wooden furniture... then we'd be talking. Although I'd prefer if they had a classier gun all together, but I suppose I can't get everything.


At least they're not neon pink. I also find it amusing that two of them have guns nearly as big as they are.
 
2013-01-20 06:52:32 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Amos Quito: Then WTF ARE you arguing in favor of here, lad?

Nothing so far. I'm just mocking people like you. I have my opinions. But since I've yet to see a gun nut so far that's remotely honest I feel no real reason to share them since it would be completely unproductive. And if we're going to be unproductive, I'm just going to amuse myself.

GUTSU: Are you supposing that just because something is banned it is unobtainable?

No.

Next stupid question?


Are you a coward, or do you have a habit of avoiding the important part of an argument? You stated " nobody's banning firearms. It's beyond unlikely that even certain firearms will get banned and not many people are even proposing such a thing." While that is factually wrong, or is Diane Feinstien, Governor Cuomo, and Bloomberg all bluster when they're screaming about banning firearms?
 
2013-01-20 06:53:11 PM  

gimmegimme: No, people want to ban certain firearms because they have the potential to cause a vast amount of carnage in a short amount of time. Looking at an unloaded machine gun isn't scary. Walking into a Wal-Mart and seeing some random wingnut packing an assault rifle IS scary. (Particularly in light of the fact that even people at gun shows can't prevent accidental discharge.)


People who think they need to walk around in public with a gun like that are the very people who need to kept from guns in the first place.
 
2013-01-20 06:53:41 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: gimmegimme: So did you have a problem with any of the President's executive orders?

Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

As long as they keep this to safety, and not propaganda designed to instill fear of certain types of guns.

Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

Should we be limiting this to gun violence? Shouldn't we be looking at the root causes and prevention of all violence regardless of weapon used?

Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

Unless you're eating your guns, a physician doesn't have a need to know about them.


Mental health concerns are for more than just feeling suicidal.
 
2013-01-20 06:53:56 PM  

TheJoe03: So you're trolling but somehow complaining the other side isn't arguing in good faith.


Whatever helps you feel better about your terrible opinions.

See, the difference is I'm not making any secret of the fact that I'm not participating honestly. Can't say so much for the other side with it's "people with balls commit crimes" and "fewer guns can't reduce gun deaths" arguments.

If one of you lunatics ever chooses to try acting remotely honest and intelligent I'll reconsider my position. But as long as the prevalent attitude from the gun nut side is "ANYTHING IS TOO MUCH MAH GERNS IS SACRIT" my response is going to remain a solid "go fark yourself".
 
2013-01-20 06:55:23 PM  

Xcott: Amos Quito: Total number of homicides committed with rifles in 2011: 323  (This would include but is not limited to "Assault Rifles")

Compare to:

Knives or cutting instruments: 1,694
Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc): 496
Personal weapons (hands, feet, etc): 726

In spite of the emotionally hyped recent events, knives, blunt objects and HANDS AND FEET have all proven to be FAR more deadly than all rifles.

Yes, that's why we only had one Sandy Hook, compared to like five mass killings where a schizo kid forced his way into an elementary school and killed a couple dozen kids using dim mak, the touch of death.

That's why we have so many problems with murderers going on punching sprees in movie theaters. And then there was all those people who died in Tuscon when that guy started giving out noogies.

Clearly when we count up all the killing sprees of the last few years, almost all of them are accomplished using hands and feet, and maybe one of them might have involved a firearm. Anyone who stares at numbers on the Internet to the exclusion of all else can tell you that.

/I apologize for reminding you that Sandy Hook was a real thing that actually happened.



Sorry, but the fact that our precious lawmakers are targeting a group of weapons that will have no appreciable effect on the overall firearms murder rate makes me doubt the legitimacy of their purported motives.

Handguns are the murder weapon of choice, They're just trying to get their nose under the tent for a broad ban.
 
2013-01-20 06:55:26 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: GUTSU:

At least they're not neon pink. I also find it amusing that two of them have guns nearly as big as they are.

True, at least they aren't completely tasteless.
 
2013-01-20 06:56:32 PM  

gimmegimme: Amos Quito: gimmegimme: Looking at an unloaded machine gun isn't scary. Walking into a Wal-Mart and seeing some random wingnut packing an assault rifle IS scary.

[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Only because you're not used to it,

Where is that, Somalia? Libya?



The Promised Land.
 
2013-01-20 06:56:48 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Whatever helps you feel better about your terrible opinions.


What opinions of mine are terrible? How am I a lunatic? Maybe you are the issue here, your tone does not welcome "honest and intelligent" debate.

/slow your jets troll
 
2013-01-20 06:57:22 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: TheJoe03: So you're trolling but somehow complaining the other side isn't arguing in good faith.

Whatever helps you feel better about your terrible opinions.

See, the difference is I'm not making any secret of the fact that I'm not participating honestly. Can't say so much for the other side with it's "people with balls commit crimes" and "fewer guns can't reduce gun deaths" arguments.

If one of you lunatics ever chooses to try acting remotely honest and intelligent I'll reconsider my position. But as long as the prevalent attitude from the gun nut side is "ANYTHING IS TOO MUCH MAH GERNS IS SACRIT" my response is going to remain a solid "go fark yourself".


"Why won't those inbred gun loving hicks just sit down and realize I'm right?"
 
2013-01-20 06:58:00 PM  

Amos Quito: gimmegimme: Amos Quito: gimmegimme: Looking at an unloaded machine gun isn't scary. Walking into a Wal-Mart and seeing some random wingnut packing an assault rifle IS scary.

[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Only because you're not used to it,

Where is that, Somalia? Libya?


The Promised Land.


Wow. I've never met someone who would choose Libya over America. Fascinating. Please be careful.
 
2013-01-20 06:58:23 PM  

GUTSU: Are you a coward, or do you have a habit of avoiding the important part of an argument? You stated " nobody's banning firearms. It's beyond unlikely that even certain firearms will get banned and not many people are even proposing such a thing." While that is factually wrong, or is Diane Feinstien, Governor Cuomo, and Bloomberg all bluster when they're screaming about banning firearms?


Allow me to clarify my point: a federal ban.

I can't help that individual states have more common sense than the nation as a whole. Feel free to move to a more inbred state if it bothers you so much living with people who don't feel like they need a Busmaster to defend themselves from squirrels in Central Park.
 
2013-01-20 06:58:23 PM  

GUTSU: Keizer_Ghidorah: GUTSU:

At least they're not neon pink. I also find it amusing that two of them have guns nearly as big as they are.
True, at least they aren't completely tasteless.


I'm still trying to figure out where that picture was taken.
 
2013-01-20 06:59:12 PM  

Sagus: Wayne 985: Sagus: Wayne 985: Alonjar: Jim_Callahan: And by point of contention I mean it's the actual arguable one. Closing the gun-show loophole basically everyone agrees is a good idea, it's like 99% likely to happen, the one-test AWB basically everyone agrees is a stupid idea worth opposing, it's kind of a snowball in hell. Magazine size limits are sort of the part that can go either way without much trouble.

Aaaaaaarrrrgh

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GUNSHOW LOOPHOLE.

How many farking times does this have to be explained. You have zero knowledge on gun laws, or why the laws are the way they are. Therefore, you should shut your mouth about things you have absolutely no knowledge about, and leave decision making to people that bother to be diligent.

Gunshows arent even a damn thing... they are a SWAP MEET. Thats all a gunshow is... a giant swap meet. You want to outlaw too many people from congregating together in the same place? Because thats all you would be doing.

40% of gun sales are without a background check. That sounds like a pretty big "loophole", regardless of the semantics you want to use.

I'm gonna go ahead and call a big pile of B.S. on this one. Care to cite your source?

The ATF. Link

It's been all over the news for the last couple weeks.

I've always lived in states that background checks at gun shows, thought it was nationwide


Depends on the state. North Carolina, ironically, has pretty strict and "universal" rules on the matter.
 
2013-01-20 06:59:41 PM  

TheJoe03: Instead of adding new laws, how about enforce the ones that exist?


I thought that was supposed to be an unconstitutional communist power grab by the executive branch.
 
2013-01-20 07:00:03 PM  

Amos Quito: gimmegimme: Amos Quito: gimmegimme: Looking at an unloaded machine gun isn't scary. Walking into a Wal-Mart and seeing some random wingnut packing an assault rifle IS scary.

[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Only because you're not used to it,

Where is that, Somalia? Libya?


The Promised Land.


Ah, Israel.

Where every citizen is required to be in the military for a couple of years and receives training on how to properly handle a gun,

Brilliant comparison...(sarcasm)
 
2013-01-20 07:00:13 PM  

TheJoe03: Maybe you are the issue here, your tone does not welcome "honest and intelligent" debate.


No shiat?

It's almost like I'm mimicking certain people for effect.... who would they be though?

Nope, can't imagine.
 
2013-01-20 07:01:25 PM  

Amos Quito: Are you ready to try the anti-Semite card again?


Why were you going to blame the Jews for my comment?
 
2013-01-20 07:01:35 PM  

Xcott: I thought that was supposed to be an unconstitutional communist power grab by the executive branch.


I don't think enforcing already existing laws is a bad thing and it's a lot better than politicians pushing pointless new laws because of a tragedy.
 
2013-01-20 07:02:59 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: No shiat?

It's almost like I'm mimicking certain people for effect.... who would they be though?

Nope, can't imagine.


Two wrongs making a right isn't always the best justification.
 
2013-01-20 07:03:16 PM  

TheJoe03: Xcott: I thought that was supposed to be an unconstitutional communist power grab by the executive branch.

I don't think enforcing already existing laws is a bad thing and it's a lot better than politicians pushing pointless new laws because of a tragedy.


Good point. We need to make sure the laws aren't pointless. A lot of legislation gets watered down because of the insane people.
 
2013-01-20 07:06:01 PM  

TheJoe03: Two wrongs making a right isn't always the best justification.


Who said it was justification for anything? I'm not justifying anything.

These threads are entirely pointless since the gun nut side of the "debate" has made it clear they have no interest in having a debate at all. To them, the only acceptable solution to gun violence is no solution at all or to escalate it.

So fark them. I'll just harass them for my own amusement instead.
 
2013-01-20 07:06:33 PM  

gimmegimme: TheJoe03: Xcott: I thought that was supposed to be an unconstitutional communist power grab by the executive branch.

I don't think enforcing already existing laws is a bad thing and it's a lot better than politicians pushing pointless new laws because of a tragedy.

Good point. We need to make sure the laws aren't pointless. A lot of legislation gets watered down because of the insane people.


The same people banning Big Gulp's are the same people trying to ban assault weapons, so it's clear the laws are going to be pointless and ineffective. They'd rather appear to be doing something instead of actually doing something.
 
2013-01-20 07:06:36 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Amos Quito: Then WTF ARE you arguing in favor of here, lad?

Nothing so far. I'm just mocking people like you. I have my opinions. But since I've yet to see a gun nut so far that's remotely honest I feel no real reason to share them since it would be completely unproductive. And if we're going to be unproductive, I'm just going to amuse myself.

GUTSU: Are you supposing that just because something is banned it is unobtainable?

No.

Next stupid question?


I've decided to favorite Popsicle. But I can't decide on Lord of the Trolls or something simple like Total POS for his tag.
 
2013-01-20 07:07:21 PM  

doglover: Target shooting is a thing in and of itself, and more than enough fun to justify legal firearms.


Sport is pantomime for warfare.

Self defense is an added bonus

You're confusing function and intent.
 
2013-01-20 07:07:45 PM  

Amos Quito: Sorry, but the fact that our precious lawmakers are targeting a group of weapons that will have no appreciable effect on the overall firearms murder rate makes me doubt the legitimacy of their purported motives.


Why? That's how most legislation ends up. It gets watered down. The changes made in the AWB were easily bypassed by gun manufacturers. Politicians got to say they were doing something. The NRA got something to scream about to raise funds. TA DA!
 
2013-01-20 07:08:06 PM  

onyxruby: therefore the 2nd amendment doesn't apply


What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you get?
 
2013-01-20 07:08:22 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Who said it was justification for anything? I'm not justifying anything.


You're justifying trolling.
 
2013-01-20 07:11:51 PM  

Amos Quito: gimmegimme: Looking at an unloaded machine gun isn't scary. Walking into a Wal-Mart and seeing some random wingnut packing an assault rifle IS scary.

[libertylinked.com image 600x446]

Only because you're not used to it,


You might notice that those weapons aren't loaded. And are slung downwards. THAT'S the difference.

Seriously. The comparison is apropos, since the fella who rolled into that store made no attempt at a safe carry. Not safe for bystanders, and not even really safe for himself. You treat any weapon as if it were live, at all times. THAT was example of an unsafe carry, and the girls pictured are FAR more professional and safe, which should tell you something...
 
2013-01-20 07:12:51 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: TheJoe03: Two wrongs making a right isn't always the best justification.

Who said it was justification for anything? I'm not justifying anything.

These threads are entirely pointless since the gun nut side of the "debate" has made it clear they have no interest in having a debate at all. To them, the only acceptable solution to gun violence is no solution at all or to escalate it.

So fark them. I'll just harass them for my own amusement instead.


Yep...you be trolling. No mater how extreme one's views, there have been multiple posters making valid arguments on both sides.
 
2013-01-20 07:13:31 PM  

TheJoe03: The same people banning Big Gulp's are the same people trying to ban assault weapons, so it's clear the laws are going to be pointless and ineffective


Oh how horrible. No more Big Gulps.

Give me a break.
 
2013-01-20 07:15:19 PM  

whidbey: Oh how horrible. No more Big Gulps.

Give me a break.


That's not the point. Do you really think a Big Gulp ban will reduce obesity or is it just window dressing?
 
2013-01-20 07:16:15 PM  

Mrtraveler01: No, I think it was really meant to keep the population armed from foreign invaders domestic insurrection in the early years

 
2013-01-20 07:16:31 PM  

TheJoe03: You're justifying trolling.


Like I said: whatever makes you feel better. You call it a trolling, I call it a justifiable lack of respect for the other side of the "debate".

I'd love to have a real discussion. I think it's extremely important both to help prevent future shootings and, in the long run, to ensure that people like me can actually continue to enjoy responsible firearms ownership.

It's just too bad the other side has decided the only real option is irresponsible and unaccountable ownership.
 
2013-01-20 07:17:05 PM  

hubiestubert: THAT was example of an unsafe carry, and the girls pictured are FAR more professional and safe, which should tell you something...


That's right...the women are smarter. The women are smarter, that's right. :)
 
2013-01-20 07:19:23 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: It's just too bad the other side has decided the only real option is irresponsible and unaccountable ownership.


That's better than calling people names while at the same time calling for an "honest and intelligent" debate. I just think it's hypocritical, that's all.
 
2013-01-20 07:19:52 PM  

CADMonkey79: there have been multiple posters making valid arguments on both sides.


Yea?

Boy, hope they can convince the other 95% to come around to their views then.
 
2013-01-20 07:21:34 PM  

TheJoe03: I just think it's hypocritical, that's all.


And you'd be right. What's your point?
 
2013-01-20 07:22:29 PM  

whidbey: TheJoe03: The same people banning Big Gulp's are the same people trying to ban assault weapons, so it's clear the laws are going to be pointless and ineffective

Oh how horrible. No more Big Gulps.

Give me a break.


First, they came for the Big Gulps and I said nothing because I don't need that much soda. Then they came for the Snickers bars and I said nothing because I try not to each that much chocolate. Then they came for the handguns and there was no one to speak up for me.
 
2013-01-20 07:22:36 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: And you'd be right. What's your point?


That you're being hypocritical and are part of the reason we can't have an intelligent debate about gun control on this site.
 
2013-01-20 07:23:31 PM  
I fervently wish that Clinton would shut up and go away.

If he hadn't signed to repeal Glass Steagal, then many of the banks wouldn't have been "to big to fail". I also doubt they would have been able to bundle home mortgages or other consumer debt. The fake money bubble wouldn't have been as big and wouldn't have crashed as hard.

As it is there have been 3.4 million foreclosures completed since 2008. We've all seen the reports on Unemployment, underemployment, and the cut backs in local and state governments. The middle class is eroding putting more strain on local governments.

Lots of little girls are suffering right now because there is not enough to eat, and they have lost their Homes I guess it doesn't matter if America's young are suffering, only if they get shot.

Fark Clinton
 
2013-01-20 07:24:00 PM  

gimmegimme: First, they came for the Big Gulps and I said nothing because I don't need that much soda. Then they came for the Snickers bars and I said nothing because I try not to each that much chocolate. Then they came for the handguns and there was no one to speak up for me.


Well Whidbey didn't answer the question, so I'll ask you, does a Big Gulp ban actually reduce obesity or is it window dressing? I'm obviously comparing that to banning assault weapons and the type of politicians that make these laws.
 
2013-01-20 07:26:00 PM  

TheJoe03: gimmegimme: First, they came for the Big Gulps and I said nothing because I don't need that much soda. Then they came for the Snickers bars and I said nothing because I try not to each that much chocolate. Then they came for the handguns and there was no one to speak up for me.

Well Whidbey didn't answer the question, so I'll ask you, does a Big Gulp ban actually reduce obesity or is it window dressing? I'm obviously comparing that to banning assault weapons and the type of politicians that make these laws.


Yes, and I am pointing out how silly it is to compare Big Gulps to assault rifles.
 
2013-01-20 07:26:04 PM  

onyxruby: Uranus Is Huge!: I'm in favor of regulating the shiat out of firearms manufacturers to the point of making them almost impossible to operate and simultaneously jacking up tariffs on foreign firearms. They do it to abortion clinics in the name of safety. All remaining firearms are registered to an owner who assumes liability for any damage or crime tied to their weapons. Mandatory 40 hours of weapons safety training. All 40 hours of this training occur in a classroom.

Explain to me the constitutional conflict. Difficulty: I have proposed no bans. I have no interest in tired slippery slopes.

All you have to do is swap 'printing' for 'gun' to see the absurdity of your statement. You do realize printing presses required licenses before the revolutionary war, right?


Not relevant. The SCOTUS ruled that women have the right to an abortion, but that hasn't prevented the derp states from severely curtailing access with regulations in the name of safety.

I don't care about pre-revolutionary laws regarding printing presses.
 
2013-01-20 07:26:16 PM  

TheJoe03: That you're being hypocritical and are part of the reason we can't have an intelligent debate about gun control on this site.


No, I'm a symptom of what happens because we can't. Just like the rest of America.

Keep dreaming big, though. I'd hate to mock you for being optimistic.
 
2013-01-20 07:26:31 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: CADMonkey79: there have been multiple posters making valid arguments on both sides.

Yea?

Boy, hope they can convince the other 95% to come around to their views then.


I bow to your trolling prowess. Uncanny. Some college kid could write a paper about it just based on your comments in this thread. You are the Master.
 
2013-01-20 07:26:52 PM  

gimmegimme: whidbey: TheJoe03: The same people banning Big Gulp's are the same people trying to ban assault weapons, so it's clear the laws are going to be pointless and ineffective

Oh how horrible. No more Big Gulps.

Give me a break.

First, they came for the Big Gulps and I said nothing because I don't need that much soda. Then they came for the Snickers bars and I said nothing because I try not to each that much chocolate. Then they came for the handguns and there was no one to speak up for me.


Well, there is a bit of a fallacy here: Big Gulps and Snickers bars only affect you (until someone develops either a mutant power or a special machine that transfers body fat from themselves to other people). A gun ejects projectiles at velocity that harm anything in a range around it.
 
2013-01-20 07:27:53 PM  

gimmegimme: Yes, and I am pointing out how silly it is to compare Big Gulps to assault rifles.


How does banning a Big Gulp reduce obesity? Also, how is it silly to compare laws that I think aren't well thought out and pushed by politicians to APPEAR they are doing something.
 
2013-01-20 07:28:34 PM  

GUTSU: Keizer_Ghidorah: GUTSU:

At least they're not neon pink. I also find it amusing that two of them have guns nearly as big as they are.
True, at least they aren't completely tasteless.


Says you. If rifles were all pink with Hello Kitty decals, a lot of the people who shouldn't have guns, wouldn't.

Instead of banning weapons, we should simply mandate that firearms look as girly as possible. You can choose between pink or lilac, accessories will be made to look like dildos and have names like "the ticklemaster rabbit 3000."

Add to this the requirement that high-capacity magazines be renamed "handicap magazines" with big wheelchair logos printed on them, and you'll probably get all the ITGs to take up bowling instead. People who really do view a rifle as a tool, like a shovel, will just shrug whatever: this year's shovel is blue, last year's was yellow, and when I'm clearing my driveway at 6AM I couldn't give half a crap whether the shovel is pink with ponies on it.
 
Displayed 50 of 1115 comments

First | « | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report