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.

(Arkansas Matters)   Due to recent attacks on Christians, Arkansas clergy meet to recognize the need for more guns at Sunday services   (arkansasmatters.com) divider line 65
    More: Asinine, Central Arkansas, Arkansas, st mark, worship service, Malta, seminaries, Baptist church, churches  
•       •       •

801 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Jan 2013 at 8:16 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-24 02:54:16 AM  
Wellllll... at least they're only talking about members and ex-members of law enforcement bringing their guns.  I imagine this will all come to nothing.  Wait, no.  I *hope* this will all come to nothing.  Because if it comes to firing guns, well, there's one way everything can end up well, and so very very very many ways that it can't.
 
2013-01-24 07:20:03 AM  
It's just as Jesus would have wanted.
 
2013-01-24 08:15:33 AM  
What would Jesus shoot?
 
2013-01-24 08:18:51 AM  
That's fine. They should be allowed to completely misunderstand their religion and its teachings if they wish.
 
2013-01-24 08:19:22 AM  
i'll be home enjoying b&b

www.broadsheet.ie
 
2013-01-24 08:19:23 AM  
Yep. Just what they need in church.

/I wish the responsible gun owners would get together to oppose the NRA so that we can have an adult conversation about this.
 
2013-01-24 08:20:24 AM  
I'm trying to think of an example where an evangelical church in the U.S. that wasn't black or liberal was bombed or shot up. Drawing a blank.
 
2013-01-24 08:20:54 AM  
If you think there's a need for guns in churches, isn't that tacit admission that you believe your god doesn't actually love you enough to protect you?
 
2013-01-24 08:21:53 AM  
Poor Christians... So persecuted in this country.
 
2013-01-24 08:22:10 AM  

Blathering Idjut: I'm trying to think of an example where an evangelical church in the U.S. that wasn't black or liberal was bombed or shot up. Drawing a blank.


unitarians are not evangelicals.
 
2013-01-24 08:23:58 AM  
In fairness, teabaggers are known to show up at churches to murder people.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-01-24 08:24:04 AM  
Call them what they are: pseudo-Christians
 
2013-01-24 08:24:21 AM  
Did they follow that up with a collection to gather funds for the new persecution complex they are building adjacent to the sanctuary?
 
2013-01-24 08:25:51 AM  
You people act as if this will be the first time people will have ever carried guns. "Omg this will start a bloodbath" Newsflash, you probably walk by dozens of armed people every day, and you're still alive.
 
2013-01-24 08:26:28 AM  

Blathering Idjut: I'm trying to think of an example where an evangelical church in the U.S. that wasn't black or liberal was bombed or shot up. Drawing a blank.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish_school_shooting


Sorry for the mobile link
 
2013-01-24 08:27:21 AM  

d23: Call them what they are: pseudo-Christians


I prefer "Christianists".
 
2013-01-24 08:27:47 AM  
I know technically not a church but a church school
 
2013-01-24 08:32:17 AM  

pueblonative: I know technically not a church but a church school


I was going to say. But being pedantic about something like that would make me look like an ass.
 
2013-01-24 08:37:32 AM  
These people should just replace their Jesus statues with statues of firearms and be done with it...

In each case, it's just the weak and scared looking for a crutch to empower them.
 
2013-01-24 08:44:36 AM  
Cops having guns in church? There is a problem with that? I saw an off duty cop with a shoulder holster at a Christmas service once and I went to a libby lib Episcopal church.
 
2013-01-24 08:49:01 AM  
What about turning the other cheek? A Christian who has only been shot through one side of the head isn't exactly living up to Jesus's teachings.
 
2013-01-24 08:51:52 AM  
Finally read the article. It's not as "MOAR GUNZ" derpy as I'd expect, but still:

FTA: "I pastored in Malta, Texas when I first got out of seminary. Daingerfield, Texas in the mid 80's had a gunman come in and kill a bunch of people," says Pastor Ricky Lee.


If the most recent example you are pulling is from three decades ago, you may not have that much of a need.
 
2013-01-24 08:59:36 AM  

VonEvilstein: What about turning the other cheek?

 
2013-01-24 08:59:41 AM  

pueblonative: Finally read the article. It's not as "MOAR GUNZ" derpy as I'd expect, but still:

FTA: "I pastored in Malta, Texas when I first got out of seminary. Daingerfield, Texas in the mid 80's had a gunman come in and kill a bunch of people," says Pastor Ricky Lee.


If the most recent example you are pulling is from three decades ago, you may not have that much of a need.


Yet people are arguing for gun bans when they have a 00.003% chance of being killed by one, and this number includes gang related crime, so if you're just a regular person, it's less than half of that. Oh, that's right, math doesn't count if it makes gun control advocates look paranoid.
 
2013-01-24 09:02:16 AM  
How about neo-Christians? Which have the same relationship to Christianity as neo-Cons do to actual Conservatives.
 
2013-01-24 09:03:56 AM  
Pastor: `Would you all stand to pass the peace?'

Bullet-head: `I ain't surrenderin' mah piece! 2nd amendment WHARRRGRBLL!!!'

Pastor: (facepalming) `Jesus Christ!'
 
2013-01-24 09:04:37 AM  

Kome: If you think there's a need for guns in churches, isn't that tacit admission that you believe your god doesn't actually love you enough to protect you?


Protect you from your fellow parishioners.
 
2013-01-24 09:12:54 AM  
Thou shall not kill.

Farking Christians in name only.
 
2013-01-24 09:17:43 AM  
You know what, who gives a shiat? The only people they will end up harming are themselves when some person gets "possessed by the Lord's spirit" and decides to show his devotion by randomly firing off his colt.
 
2013-01-24 09:20:21 AM  

Citrate1007: Thou shall not kill.

Farking Christians in name only.


Well, except that it's Thou shalt not murder.
 
2013-01-24 09:22:11 AM  

Lost Thought 00: You know what, who gives a shiat? The only people they will end up harming are themselves when some person gets "possessed by the Lord's spirit" and decides to show his devotion by randomly firing off his colt.


images1.wikia.nocookie.net

"I sez a-praise be to Jesus... Yeehaw! Imma rootinest, tootinest wildest bible thumper this side o' the Rio Grande!!!"
 
2013-01-24 09:24:15 AM  
They aren't going to let Jesus into these churches, are they?
 
2013-01-24 09:30:42 AM  

Blathering Idjut: I'm trying to think of an example where an evangelical church in the U.S. that wasn't black or liberal was bombed or shot up. Drawing a blank.


Well there was that conservative church where the abortion doctor was shot up by another member of the congregation if that counts?
 
2013-01-24 09:42:31 AM  
Whew. I was worried that there might not be a gun thread before noon.
 
2013-01-24 10:15:18 AM  
It's almost as if they lack Faith. For did not Jesus rebuke them in the bible for not having enough Faith in Him to protect them for everything and then later rebuked them for having weapons?
 
2013-01-24 10:31:59 AM  
What "recent attacks on Christians" are you referring to, subby? The only reference to an actual shooting in TFA is from the 80s.
 
2013-01-24 10:40:18 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: pueblonative: Finally read the article. It's not as "MOAR GUNZ" derpy as I'd expect, but still:

FTA: "I pastored in Malta, Texas when I first got out of seminary. Daingerfield, Texas in the mid 80's had a gunman come in and kill a bunch of people," says Pastor Ricky Lee.


If the most recent example you are pulling is from three decades ago, you may not have that much of a need.

Yet people are arguing for gun bans when they have a 00.003% chance of being killed by one, and this number includes gang related crime, so if you're just a regular person, it's less than half of that. Oh, that's right, math doesn't count if it makes gun control advocates look paranoid.


"I need my piece on me at all times wherever I go just in case I get attacked by those unsavory types! And I have a right to stockpile military grade weaponry just in case the tyrannical government sends its jack-booted thugs to take them! It's going to happen! Read the signs! ANY DAY NOW JUST YOU WATCH!!!"

...but it's the gun control types who're paranoid.
 
2013-01-24 10:54:26 AM  

xalres: BraveNewCheneyWorld: pueblonative: Finally read the article. It's not as "MOAR GUNZ" derpy as I'd expect, but still:

FTA: "I pastored in Malta, Texas when I first got out of seminary. Daingerfield, Texas in the mid 80's had a gunman come in and kill a bunch of people," says Pastor Ricky Lee.


If the most recent example you are pulling is from three decades ago, you may not have that much of a need.

Yet people are arguing for gun bans when they have a 00.003% chance of being killed by one, and this number includes gang related crime, so if you're just a regular person, it's less than half of that. Oh, that's right, math doesn't count if it makes gun control advocates look paranoid.

"I need my piece on me at all times wherever I go just in case I get attacked by those unsavory types! And I have a right to stockpile military grade weaponry just in case the tyrannical government sends its jack-booted thugs to take them! It's going to happen! Read the signs! ANY DAY NOW JUST YOU WATCH!!!"

...but it's the gun control types who're paranoid.


It looks like you're using a derpy hypothetical caricature as a citation. That's the first sign that you're on the wrong side of a battle. Here's the second..

Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

/eagerly awaiting your mental gymnastics
 
2013-01-24 10:59:33 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?


LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.
 
2013-01-24 11:03:45 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.


It's the FBI crime stats. As usual, you're full of fail. Fail and ad hominem.
 
2013-01-24 11:08:49 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.

It's the FBI crime stats. As usual, you're full of fail. Fail and ad hominem.


And you're projecting your own fear and paranoia onto others. Aren't we just a wonderful dysfunctional family?
 
2013-01-24 11:11:37 AM  

xalres: BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.

It's the FBI crime stats. As usual, you're full of fail. Fail and ad hominem.

And you're projecting your own fear and paranoia onto others. Aren't we just a wonderful dysfunctional family?


In what way am I projecting? Do people or do people not want to control guns because they have a .003% chance of being killed? We're always hearing that 12,000 people are murdered with guns each year, well that's what the percentage is. That's not projecting, I'm just showing you the same number that gets you all fearful and gun grabby as a probability. It's not my fault you look ridiculous.
 
2013-01-24 11:15:16 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.

It's the FBI crime stats. As usual, you're full of fail. Fail and ad hominem.


Show the stats, show the math. You're too dumb for this and you know it.
 
2013-01-24 11:16:01 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Do people or do people not want to control guns because they have a .003% chance of being killed?


Another retard that thinks body count is the only consideration.
 
2013-01-24 11:20:33 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: xalres: BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.

It's the FBI crime stats. As usual, you're full of fail. Fail and ad hominem.

And you're projecting your own fear and paranoia onto others. Aren't we just a wonderful dysfunctional family?

In what way am I projecting? Do people or do people not want to control guns because they have a .003% chance of being killed? We're always hearing that 12,000 people are murdered with guns each year, well that's what the percentage is. That's not projecting, I'm just showing you the same number that gets you all fearful and gun grabby as a probability. It's not my fault you look ridiculous.


It's just funny that you see no paranoia whatsoever in the people fighting to be able to carry a firearm at all times because it'll keep them safe from this nebulous "other" who wants to beat them up and take their stuff.
 
2013-01-24 11:23:23 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.

It's the FBI crime stats. As usual, you're full of fail. Fail and ad hominem.

Show the stats, show the math. You're too dumb for this and you know it.


violent crime/population.  Oh and surprise, more ad hominem devoid of content. All you ever do is essentially yell something like "no fark you, you're stupid and wrong" Guess what, that's not an argument. The only thing you're convincing anyone of is the fact that you can't convey a coherent thought.

Every time you complain that gun owners are paranoid, just remember that they are planning for an eventuality that is 100 times more likely than your fear of gun violence. If they're unreasonable, you are 100 times as unreasonable.
 
2013-01-24 11:30:21 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Do people or do people not want to control guns because they have a .003% chance of being killed?

Another retard that thinks body count is the only consideration.


Let's see your numbers then. I see absolutely zero factual information from you, ever.

xalres: It's just funny that you see no paranoia whatsoever in the people fighting to be able to carry a firearm at all times because it'll keep them safe from this nebulous "other" who wants to beat them up and take their stuff.


Are cops paranoid? Are cops patrolling a different, segregated part of the country that we don't interact with? You're worried about your .003% chance of being murdered with a gun so much that you want to control guns and you're not paranoid, while gun owners want to protect themselves from a .4% chance of being the victim of a violent crime, and they are? You cannot logically justify that. This is clear evidence of a ridiculous bias on your part.
 
2013-01-24 11:34:48 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Let's compare your safety concern to a gun owner's. You're worried about a .003% chance of dying to a gun crime. Now consider that there were 1,246,248 violent crimes, giving you a .4% chance of being in a situation requiring a gun. Who's paranoid here? Is it gun owners with 00.4%, or you with 00.003%?

LOL questionable statisitcs

Here's reality - you can't leave your house without a weapon because you're a paranoid freak.

It's the FBI crime stats. As usual, you're full of fail. Fail and ad hominem.

Show the stats, show the math. You're too dumb for this and you know it.

violent crime/population.


Now show your math. We both know you don't understand statistics.

Oh and surprise, more ad hominem devoid of content.

I've so thoroughly dominated you that that's really all you deserve. In fact, I want you to thank me for acknowledging your existence.

All you ever do is essentially yell something like "no fark you, you're stupid and wrong" Guess what, that's not an argument. The only thing you're convincing anyone of is the fact that you can't convey a coherent thought.

No, you're thinking of my alt.

Every time you complain that gun owners are paranoid, just remember that they are planning for an eventuality that is 100 times more likely than your fear of gun violence. If they're unreasonable, you are 100 times as unreasonable.

According to your formulas, sure.
 
2013-01-24 11:34:49 AM  

the_foo: Citrate1007: Thou shall not kill.

Farking Christians in name only.

Well, except that it's Thou shalt not murder.


That is Old Testament shiat.....if all you are going to live by is the Old Testament then you are more Jewish than Christian.
 
2013-01-24 11:36:22 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HotWingConspiracy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Do people or do people not want to control guns because they have a .003% chance of being killed?

Another retard that thinks body count is the only consideration.

Let's see your numbers then. I see absolutely zero factual information from you, ever.


You want to see numbers about how body count isn't the only consideration?

Best cling to your guns, that's what you understand.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
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