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.
Duplicate of another approved link: 7549985


(KHOU Houston) NewsFlash Guns Are Keeping Us Safe 2013 tour makes a visit to Lone Star College   (khou.com) divider line 175
    More: NewsFlash, Lone Star College, Ben Taub General Hospital, Texas Medical Center, Intercontinental Airport, precincts  
•       •       •

2476 clicks; Favorite

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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-22 03:27:01 PM

netizencain: If only we could set up some sort of Gun-Free area or zone where criminals would not be allowed to bring their weapons


What's so great about this story is that the intended victim and the initial shooter BOTH were safe with their guns and neither of them got shot (until the police arrived then one was shot by the Police). The shooting victims were unarmed students caught in the cross fire. Clearly they would have been safer if they ALSO had guns.

/I also heard that last week a guy in China killed 46 children with a pair of chopsticks, so the innocent bystanders in this situation could just as easily have been injured if the assailants were throwing lawnmowers at each other (or however kids kill each other when there are no guns available)
 
2013-01-22 03:27:06 PM
Do we really need 2 newsflash headlines?
 
2013-01-22 03:27:21 PM

BronyMedic: GodLovesBeer: A: Handgungs
B: Black or Hispanic
C:Most defiantly voted for Obama
D: All of the above

Any takers?

I'll take "Things an idiot would say" for 500, Alex.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 850x553]


A paramedic in Memphis? Come now....you see this shat all the time.
 
2013-01-22 03:27:26 PM

propasaurus: TX legislator last week who said no one's gonna start shooting in Texas because they know everyone's armed


Whoops...

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-22 03:27:38 PM

GodLovesBeer: A: Handgungs
B: Black or Hispanic
C:Most defiantly voted for Obama
D: All of the above

Any takers?


My money's on handgungs.
 
2013-01-22 03:27:45 PM

GanjSmokr: netizencain: If only we could set up some sort of Gun-Free area or zone where criminals would not be allowed to bring their weapons

Agreed. Maybe we should make some laws against randomly shooting people as well.


Yeah, that would never work. Let's just give up on these "law" things all together.
 
2013-01-22 03:27:50 PM
OMG HEEP YOUR HEAD DOWN!
IT'S A FRECKING WAR ZONE OUT THERE.....
CALL IN SWAT, THE A-TEAM, NINJAS, THE DUKES OF HAZARD, MAGNUM P.I. THE FARKING BATMAN.

askanatheist.tv

WE'LL BE FIGHTING IN THE STREETS
WITH OUR CHILDREN AT OUR FEET
AND THE MORALS THAT THEY WORSHIP, WILL BE GONE....


/had to post before the pulled the REPEAT THREAD
 
2013-01-22 03:27:58 PM
It's Texas.  How do we know this isn't just part of Freshman Orientation?
 
2013-01-22 03:28:34 PM
Are the Modmins trolling us?
 
2013-01-22 03:28:51 PM

GanjSmokr: Elzar: Kit Fister: markie_farkie: choo: Teacher or bystander on the phone says two guys fighting, both pull guns and start shooting at each other with one teacher hit.

Well then it's a fair fight, the NRA can come to the shooters' defense, and tell the teacher to go pound sand because they were too stupid to pack their own heat, and be ready at any moment for gunfire to break out in a library..

Only in texas.

I'd certainly feel safer if only they let me purchase my own rocket launcher - I have a wife and kids to support - thugs see my rcoket launcher and it will deter them. Side benefit is the added upper-body workout from packing that thing around.

If you can pass a background check and have enough money, you might be surprised just how safe you can make yourself feel...

/many things aren't necessarily "illegal" to get, just "inconvenient" to get
//you just have to go through enough hoops and pay enough money.


In a way, that made it an excellent deterrent to gangsters wanting to own one. Most people who aren't legit don't want to go through all the hoops, licenses, taxes, waiting periods, etc.

The result is that while legal, they are quite rare indeed. always wonder why they didn't build the AWB like that. Just declare that you need a license / extensive bg check/ transfer tax to buy weapons of types A, b, c, etc. No 'ban' just making them harder to get or sell.

I don't support any bans, but that would have worked a hell of a lot better then what they passed.
 
2013-01-22 03:29:28 PM
i.imgur.com

By Saul Cornell / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

In the coming months, as the nation begins a serious discussion about gun regulation, the meaning of the Second Amendment - the statement that "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" - will be much discussed.

It is vital that Americans separate myths from realities, because what many of us seem to have forgotten is that, in the vision of the founders of the United States of America, the right to bear arms carries with it enormous burdens and responsibilities.

In fact, if we restored the Second Amendment to its original meaning, it would be the NRA's worst nightmare. Invoking the Second Amendment ought to be a more effective argument for increased regulation than it is against it.

In 2008, a closely divided Supreme Court abandoned more than 70 years of precedent and for the first time in American history affirmed that the Second Amendment is about a right to have a handgun in the home for self-defense. Lost in most of the commentary then and now is that this is almost the exactly opposite of what James Madison, the primary architect of the amendment, intended, and is hard to reconcile with the way most ordinary Americans would have read it in 1791.

In 1776, most of the original state constitutions did not even include an arms-bearing provision. The few states that did usually also included a clause protecting the right not to bear arms. Why? Because, in contrast to other cherished rights such as freedom of speech or religion, the state could not compel you to speak or pray. It could force you to bear arms.

The founders had a simple reason for curbing this right: Quakers and other religious pacifists were opposed to bearing arms, and wished to be exempt from an obligation that could be made incumbent on all male citizens at the time.

When the Second Amendment is discussed today, we tend to think of those "militias" as just a bunch of ordinary guys with guns, empowering themselves to resist authority when and if necessary. Nothing could be further from the founders' vision.

Militias were tightly controlled organizations legally defined and regulated by the individual colonies before the Revolution and, after independence, by the individual states. Militia laws ran on for pages and were some of the lengthiest pieces of legislation in the statute books. States kept track of who had guns, had the right to inspect them in private homes and could fine citizens for failing to report to a muster.

These laws also defined what type of guns you had to buy - a form of taxation levied on individual households. Yes, long before Obamacare, the state made you buy something, even if you did not want to purchase it. (The guns required by law were muskets, not pistols. The only exceptions to this general rule were the horsemen's pistols that dragoons and other mounted units needed.)

The founders had a word for a bunch of farmers marching with guns without government sanction: a mob. One of the reasons we have a Constitution is the founders were worried about the danger posed by individuals acting like a militia without legal authority. This was precisely what happened during Shays' Rebellion, an insurrection in western Massachusetts that persuaded many Americans that we needed a stronger central government to avert anarchy.

Many people think that we have the Second Amendment so that we can take up arms against the government if it overreaches its authority. If that interpretation were correct, it would mean that the Second Amendment had repealed the Constitution's treason clause, which defines this crime as taking up arms against the government. In reality, in the first decade after the Constitution, the government put down several rebellions similar to Shays - and nobody claimed that they were merely asserting their Second Amendment rights.

So if the Second Amendment does not have much to do about owning a pistol for self-defense, does that mean the founders did not esteem this right? Obviously the answer to that question is no. Not every right valued by Americans was expressly protected by a constitutional provision. The right of self-defense was part of the common law, a long tradition of rights defined by the English courts over a period of centuries.

But rather than invoke the Second Amendment in the coming months, Americans need to learn something about the historical origins of this part of our constitutional tradition. The bottom line is simple: the Second Amendment requires more gun regulation, not less.

Cornell is the Paul and Diane Guenther Chair in American History at Fordham University.


yeah..
 
2013-01-22 03:29:32 PM

netizencain: If only we could set up some sort of Gun-Free area or zone where criminals would not be allowed to bring their weapons


Since we obviously can't trust people to follow the laws about where they can carry their weapons, I guess we need to take away the weapons entirely.
 
2013-01-22 03:29:37 PM

Andulamb: GodLovesBeer: A: Handgungs
B: Black or Hispanic
C:Most defiantly voted for Obama
D: All of the above

Any takers?

My money's on handgungs.


We need more open handgung style...
 
2013-01-22 03:29:37 PM
So good, we had to greenlite it twice.
 
2013-01-22 03:29:37 PM

BarnabusJ: Are the Modmins trolling us?


They certainly don't have to try very hard. These threads are like throwing meat into a tank full of piranhas. Maybe this is just a preemptive overflow to keep the server load down.
 
2013-01-22 03:29:50 PM

spr: guess how many people died of vehicular manslaughter yesterday, or hammer attack? waaaaaaaay more. Curious what "coincidentally" pops up in the mainstream news. its almost like there is an agenda.

/what you did there, I see it.


Guns aren't any more useful for killing people than sardines, which is why the Marines traded in their M4s and M16s for a few tins of King Oscars.
 
2013-01-22 03:29:56 PM
They should have put up more signs saying "Gun Free Zone." The shooter probably didn't know.
 
2013-01-22 03:30:40 PM
So, multiple threads for each and every violent crime is the way Fark is trending now?

/I miss Boobies threads
//Hell, I even miss Kitwilly
///Slashies
 
2013-01-22 03:31:12 PM
Yay Freedom!

\And yes, I am a bad person for saying that.
\\Still haunted by the mental image of dead children stacked like cordwood in that Sandy Hook classroom.
 
2013-01-22 03:31:13 PM

GodLovesBeer: C:Most defiantly voted for Obama


I defiantly voted for Obama.
I was all like "F*ck you! I'm voting for Obama whether you like it or not!"
 
2013-01-22 03:31:13 PM

Pantubo: They should have put up more signs saying "Gun Free Zone." The shooter probably didn't know.


THIS
 
2013-01-22 03:31:53 PM
Repeat
 
2013-01-22 03:32:07 PM
This is what you voted for, Texans. No sympathy.
 
2013-01-22 03:32:08 PM

Elzar: I'd certainly feel safer if only they let me purchase my own rocket launcher - I have a wife and kids to support - thugs see my rcoket launcher and it will deter them. Side benefit is the added upper-body workout from packing that thing around.


i.imgur.com

See dammit, if only someone had been trained in Force Lightning, this would have all been much more incredibly awesome.

 
2013-01-22 03:32:35 PM
Did the party move over here, now? Why did no one tell me? I thought you guys liked me!?!
 
2013-01-22 03:33:16 PM

Fark It: Elzar: Fark It: Elzar: *checks watch*

Nope, still not the time to talk...

Well, we don't know who did the shooting and why, or with what kind of weapon. It's too early to even blame gun owners and the NRA, let alone have a discussion.

Agreed - but I think it is the time to discuss why the 2nd amendment doesn't mention full automatic weapons and yet our rights are trampled by not allowing every man free access to the machine gun/rocket launcher of choice. Soon only criminals will own machine guns and rocket launchers.

Most states allow people to buy machine guns, there is just an extra, extensive registration process. The machine gun registry was closed in 1986 because of the Hughes Amendment, which was ramrodded through as an Amendment to the FOPA despite failing to garner enough votes to be added in.

/complain about the lack of a reasonable discussion
//immediately start talking about machine guns and rocket launchers


Next up: So where does it end?! So you're saying the 2A means you can have nukes?!?!

The capacity of the magazine doesn't make much difference to a guy shooting fish in a barrel. Ask the V. Tech shooter who changed magazines 17 times. Capacity WILL make a BIG difference to the home owner fending off 2 or 3 intruders or just one with a gun... the first one to run out of bullets usually dies... so a mag capacity limit means law abiding people have 10 (or 7) and the criminal gets 15 (or 30)


Great ideas come from brilliant minds.


The reason calling it a "clip" disqualifies you from the convo is because if you can't even be informed enough to know what the most simple of terms are, how can you possibly be informed enough to have that "rational" discussion you say you want to have.
 
2013-01-22 03:33:31 PM
Article says the shooting occurred at a community college. Clearly the answer is to keep guns out of the hands of the poors.
 
2013-01-22 03:34:18 PM

JesusJuice: This is what you voted for, Texans. No sympathy.


You realize this school was a "gun free zone", not sure what Texas guns laws have to do with this shooting. I guess any excuse to make fun of Texas. Who cares about the people who got shot, you have political points to score! No sympathy? Wow, you're a bad person.
 
2013-01-22 03:34:59 PM

Pantubo: They should have put up more signs saying "Gun Free Zone." The shooter probably didn't know.


So you're saying that we need laws that prevent people from owning those guns in the first place?
 
2013-01-22 03:35:34 PM

GameSprocket: netizencain: If only we could set up some sort of Gun-Free area or zone where criminals would not be allowed to bring their weapons

Since we obviously can't trust people to follow the laws about where they can carry their weapons, I guess we need to take away the weapons entirely.


www.nndb.com
"Go on..."
 
2013-01-22 03:35:39 PM
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun, is a bad guy with a gun?

The point is that this would have been worse if the shooters had resorted to assaulting on another with easy-to-make Molotov cocktails. Or something.
 
2013-01-22 03:36:04 PM
Repeat.

No, seriously. Repeat.
 
2013-01-22 03:36:44 PM
Who gets to play the "Stand Your Ground" defense if neither one died?
 
2013-01-22 03:37:03 PM
I knew "Bring A Gun To School Day" was an iffy idea......
 
2013-01-22 03:37:09 PM

Callous: GAT_00: Two more people got some glorious 2nd Amendment freedom today.

Or more accurately they got to see first hand how well Gun-Control laws really work.


Or even more accurately they got to see how making murder illegal really works.


/as long as we're being disingenuous
 
2013-01-22 03:37:31 PM

Burr: GameSprocket: netizencain: If only we could set up some sort of Gun-Free area or zone where criminals would not be allowed to bring their weapons

Since we obviously can't trust people to follow the laws about where they can carry their weapons, I guess we need to take away the weapons entirely.

[www.nndb.com image 199x248]
"Go on..."


You keep Jon Lovitz out of this!
 
2013-01-22 03:38:00 PM
The Linked Article quotes a witness as saying that two guys were arguing and one "pulled a gun". I don't know a whole lot about guns, but wouldn't this rule out an AK-47 or pretty much any assault rifle?
 
2013-01-22 03:38:40 PM
These laws also defined what type of guns you had to buy - a form of taxation levied on individual households. Yes, long before Obamacare, the state made you buy something, even if you did not want to purchase it. (The guns required by law were muskets, not pistols. The only exceptions to this general rule were the horsemen's pistols that dragoons and other mounted units needed.

So, by the logic that the government should force members of the militia to buy weapons that would be used in military action, everyone should have true military assault rifles?

Ok, if you say so, I won't argue...
 
2013-01-22 03:38:56 PM
Knowing Texas, they'll probably declare Jan. 22 a state holiday, in honor of that brave shooter who refused to let the liberal gun-grabbers take his guns away.
 
2013-01-22 03:39:08 PM

GameSprocket: Burr: GameSprocket: netizencain: If only we could set up some sort of Gun-Free area or zone where criminals would not be allowed to bring their weapons

Since we obviously can't trust people to follow the laws about where they can carry their weapons, I guess we need to take away the weapons entirely.

[www.nndb.com image 199x248]
"Go on..."

You keep Jon Lovitz out of this!


I LOL'd and now cannot unsee this.
 
2013-01-22 03:39:53 PM

TheJoe03: JesusJuice: This is what you voted for, Texans. No sympathy.

You realize this school was a "gun free zone", not sure what Texas guns laws have to do with this shooting. I guess any excuse to make fun of Texas. Who cares about the people who got shot, you have political points to score! No sympathy? Wow, you're a bad person.


He might, just might, be referring to the laws that make it really, really easy to buy that gun in the first place.

By the way- nobody expects those gun free zones to stop anybody. But it does achieve something in that it makes it easier to prosecute your case and get a longer sentence in the wake of any incident.

Your argument is a Red Herring fallacy, pure and simple.
 
2013-01-22 03:41:17 PM

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: Mr.BobDobalita: Fark It: Elzar: Fark It: Elzar: *checks watch*

Nope, still not the time to talk...

Well, we don't know who did the shooting and why, or with what kind of weapon. It's too early to even blame gun owners and the NRA, let alone have a discussion.

Agreed - but I think it is the time to discuss why the 2nd amendment doesn't mention full automatic weapons and yet our rights are trampled by not allowing every man free access to the machine gun/rocket launcher of choice. Soon only criminals will own machine guns and rocket launchers.

Most states allow people to buy machine guns, there is just an extra, extensive registration process. The machine gun registry was closed in 1986 because of the Hughes Amendment, which was ramrodded through as an Amendment to the FOPA despite failing to garner enough votes to be added in.

/complain about the lack of a reasonable discussion
//immediately start talking about machine guns and rocket launchers

Next up: So where does it end?! So you're saying the 2A means you can have nukes?!?!

The capacity of the magazine doesn't make much difference to a guy shooting fish in a barrel. Ask the V. Tech shooter who changed magazines 17 times. Capacity WILL make a BIG difference to the home owner fending off 2 or 3 intruders or just one with a gun... the first one to run out of bullets usually dies... so a mag capacity limit means law abiding people have 10 (or 7) and the criminal gets 15 (or 30)


Great ideas come from brilliant minds.


The reason calling it a "clip" disqualifies you from the convo is because if you can't even be informed enough to know what the most simple of terms are, how can you possibly be informed enough to have that "rational" discussion you say you want to have.

Remington sells "Magazine Clips." Does that disqualify them from talking about guns?



This is the dumbest talking point that comes up in every single fark gun thread. OMG! Someone called it a clip even though it technically should be called a magazine! I'm so smart because I know that!
 
2013-01-22 03:41:41 PM

cptjeff: TheJoe03: JesusJuice: This is what you voted for, Texans. No sympathy.

You realize this school was a "gun free zone", not sure what Texas guns laws have to do with this shooting. I guess any excuse to make fun of Texas. Who cares about the people who got shot, you have political points to score! No sympathy? Wow, you're a bad person.

He might, just might, be referring to the laws that make it really, really easy to buy that gun in the first place.

By the way- nobody expects those gun free zones to stop anybody. But it does achieve something in that it makes it easier to prosecute your case and get a longer sentence in the wake of any incident.

Your argument is a Red Herring fallacy, pure and simple.


Let's wait for more information about the event before we decide that nobody can ever own a gun again and anyone in Texas who is gunned down deserved it.
 
2013-01-22 03:42:05 PM
Pick a shade

www.getprice.com.au

Not a mass shooting of children; two adults acting like children in their silly little gangs.
 
2013-01-22 03:42:14 PM

pxlboy: GameSprocket: Burr: GameSprocket: netizencain: If only we could set up some sort of Gun-Free area or zone where criminals would not be allowed to bring their weapons

Since we obviously can't trust people to follow the laws about where they can carry their weapons, I guess we need to take away the weapons entirely.

[www.nndb.com image 199x248]
"Go on..."

You keep Jon Lovitz out of this!

I LOL'd and now cannot unsee this.


ACTING!
 
2013-01-22 03:42:18 PM

CPav: The Linked Article quotes a witness as saying that two guys were arguing and one "pulled a gun". I don't know a whole lot about guns, but wouldn't this rule out an AK-47 or pretty much any assault rifle?


blog.robballen.com

No.
 
2013-01-22 03:42:24 PM

Andulamb: GodLovesBeer: A: Handgungs
B: Black or Hispanic
C:Most defiantly voted for Obama
D: All of the above

Any takers?

My money's on handgungs.


HANDGUNG!!!!
 
2013-01-22 03:43:09 PM

CPav: The Linked Article quotes a witness as saying that two guys were arguing and one "pulled a gun". I don't know a whole lot about guns, but wouldn't this rule out an AK-47 or pretty much any assault rifle?


I guess that depends on how big their pockets are.
 
2013-01-22 03:43:16 PM
The lack of Spaceballs in this thread is disturbing.
 
2013-01-22 03:43:44 PM

cptjeff: TheJoe03: JesusJuice: This is what you voted for, Texans. No sympathy.

You realize this school was a "gun free zone", not sure what Texas guns laws have to do with this shooting. I guess any excuse to make fun of Texas. Who cares about the people who got shot, you have political points to score! No sympathy? Wow, you're a bad person.

He might, just might, be referring to the laws that make it really, really easy to buy that gun in the first place.

By the way- nobody expects those gun free zones to stop anybody. But it does achieve something in that it makes it easier to prosecute your case and get a longer sentence in the wake of any incident.

Your argument is a Red Herring fallacy, pure and simple.


It's a red herring fallacy to be disgusted that someone has no sympathy for people shot in Texas because of supposed gun laws that lead to this? Hmm.
 
Displayed 50 of 175 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report