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.

(NYPost)   State of NY to legal firearms owners, "Register your weapons, it's the law." Legal firearms owners to the State of NY, "Guns? I don't own any guns, and you can't prove it so go fark yourselves"   (nypost.com) divider line 1301
    More: Hero, New York, civil disobedience, Association of Baptist Churches in Ireland  
•       •       •

17845 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jan 2013 at 4:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1301 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-26 04:25:25 PM

vpb: This is one of the more amusing arguments gun nuts make.  If M-16s weren't more effective than bold action rifles, especially at close range, the DoD wouldn't have gone to the expense of buying them would it?  This argument has been shot down many times before.


Yet another idiotic comment.. congrats to making it to level 5. My M&P 15-22 uses a .22lr round. A person could be shot 5-10 times and still survive the encounter with that gun. My .45 is chambered and the barrel is rifled (i know because I rifled it) for hydroshock bullets which will put a hole the size of a grapefruit in a person. That person will be lucky if they survive one round and certainly not two in an intense situation. If I had time to aim they won't last a single round.. the M&P is much harder to aim and the target would have opportunity to shoot back regardless. So proposing the banning of the M&P assault rifle accomplishes absolutely nothing because the 10 rounds in the .45 would be much more devastating.

This is what happens when you have someone that knows nothing about guns talking about gun control. And M16 is perfectly legal to own if you want to go through the lengthy and expensive process of owning it. It will cost about $4000 and it will take about 6 months to make happen but it can be done. What person who is intent on doing a mass shooting will go through that process? You have no business talking about gun control because you have no knowledge at all of guns.

This is what is frustrating to gun owners.. People like you that are clueless when it comes to such things discussing them like you actually know what you're talking about.
 
2013-01-26 04:27:56 PM
The good old Bart Simpson defense. Beautiful.

Jack booted gun grabbers are going to have to work a lot harder than that before they come for your guns.
 
2013-01-26 04:28:26 PM
 
2013-01-26 04:30:15 PM
It takes guns to take guns.
 
spr
2013-01-26 04:31:53 PM
d3u67r7pp2lrq5.cloudfront.net
 
2013-01-26 04:32:14 PM

xynix: A person could be shot 5-10 times and still survive the encounter with that gun.


I think that's if they are past the 5th grade. I think under the 5th grade and they can only take, like, 3 rounds if they're not wearing armor. Mythbusters did an episode, if I recall.
 
2013-01-26 04:32:25 PM

Chariset: Fark It: If there's one constant in the gun control debate it's that the people who support bans and confiscation will always, without fail, overreach.

Sure.  What's a school full of dead children compared to your personal momentary inconvenience?


The appeal to emotion continues unabated, I see. Are there any other things you'd like to see built on the backs of dead children, or are you just doing what you guys always do, make tomorrow's bans the new normal to set the stage for the next opportunity?
 
2013-01-26 04:32:59 PM

xynix:
This is what is frustrating to gun owners..


Having to compensate for a small dick?
 
2013-01-26 04:33:46 PM

xynix: True story.. I'm a gun owner and I will never register my gun with any agency.. state or federal. I'm not going to be forced to do something criminals don't have to do. The government can go fark themselves.


So you drive without insurance?
 
2013-01-26 04:35:40 PM

vpb: Amos Quito: There. See how silly you look?

No.  Do I look as silly as someone who thinks playing with their toys and not having to register them like a car or a motorcycle is more important than preventing mass shootings?


How will the government knowing someone has a gun stop that person from committing a crime?

It won't... unless the government takes the gun before a crime is committed, which is a non-starter.
 
2013-01-26 04:35:42 PM
"Attica! Attica!"
 
2013-01-26 04:35:50 PM
Oh, someone stole your guns? But you don't have any guns.
 
2013-01-26 04:35:57 PM
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
The government and you anti gun pillow biters can go fark yourselves.
 
2013-01-26 04:36:04 PM
Only criminals have something to hide.
 
2013-01-26 04:36:29 PM

cameroncrazy1984: That's why I refuse to register my car. It only makes it easier for the government to take it. For some reason. I guess.


It makes it easier to track and trace. That's the whole point. That and revenue.
 
2013-01-26 04:36:38 PM

Chariset: Fark It: If there's one constant in the gun control debate it's that the people who support bans and confiscation will always, without fail, overreach.

Sure.  What's a school full of dead children compared to your personal momentary inconvenience?


Do you actually understand how offensive it is to us law abiding gun owners when people like you make statements like that?

How about instead of blaming the millions of us who have never, and will never, do anything wrong, we institute a "Project Exile", like Virginia did in the 1990s? Mandatory jail time for felons who are found in possession of a gun or ammunition, and mandatory 5 years added to your sentence if you're convicted of using a gun in a crime? Violent crime went down double-digit percentages every year for the years this was in effect.

I mean, sure, it's easier to take guns away from non-criminals, but this whole "put the bad guys in jail" think worked pretty well for Virginia. Can we try that first, please, before you come and try to tell me what I can't own?

The assault weapons ban was so ineffective last time that the best thing Feinstein could say about it was that it "made the banned guns more expensive". Can we, instead, use punishment of actual criminals, which has proven to be effective?

/whoa. Radical. Punish the bad guys.
 
2013-01-26 04:36:55 PM
Mandatory registration? Come on, hasn't anyone seen the original x-men cartoon?
 
2013-01-26 04:37:10 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-26 04:37:22 PM

BSABSVR: xynix: True story.. I'm a gun owner and I will never register my gun with any agency.. state or federal. I'm not going to be forced to do something criminals don't have to do. The government can go fark themselves.

So you drive without insurance?


If you can't see what's wrong with that analogy you should not be participating in this discussion.
 
2013-01-26 04:37:24 PM

vpb: This is one of the more amusing arguments gun nuts make. If M-16s weren't more effective than bolt action rifles, especially at close range, the DoD wouldn't have gone to the expense of buying them would it? This argument has been shot down many times before.


This is one of the more pathetic arguments anti-gun nuts make. Don't equate an M-16 with a selective rate of fire and so-called "assault rifles" available to civilians. You make yourself look stupid, or at least a disingenuous farktard.
 
2013-01-26 04:38:21 PM

GAT_00: xynix: Come on now Gat.. You know how the government works. With registration comes registration fees for one thing. Then comes a new government arm of the BATF specifically built for handling registrations.. Another 1000 empty suits processing paperwork. First the fee will be 20 or 30 bucks then it will be 100 bucks and then who knows what else.

When I get a fishing license I pay a fee.. That's fine as the DNR stocks the rivers and lakes with 100s of thousands of fish. My fee goes to a legit and tangible thing. When I get my hunting license the same thing applies as the DNR maintains the roads to get into the places where I hunt and they also stock the feeders where the deer feed during harsh winter months. Again I have something tangible for my fee. The same can be said about a car as the money I'm paying for goes to pay for roads and stop signs .. lights and rest areas. It's tangible. What do I get for my gun registration fee?

It goes beyond that anyway.. I'm constitutionally granted a right to own guns and I'm not going to register them for any reason what-so-ever and I have enough money to pay a lawyer to fight such a thing if a law like that were ever passed. I would take it to the supreme court. This shiat will not happen to me:

So, tinfoil.  If you register it, it will be taken away, because we all know that once you register your car, you're just waiting for someone to come confiscate it.


They can, for various reasons. Because owning a car is not a right.
 
2013-01-26 04:38:48 PM

xynix: vpb: This is one of the more amusing arguments gun nuts make.  If M-16s weren't more effective than bold action rifles, especially at close range, the DoD wouldn't have gone to the expense of buying them would it?  This argument has been shot down many times before.

Yet another idiotic comment.. congrats to making it to level 5. My M&P 15-22 uses a .22lr round. A person could be shot 5-10 times and still survive the encounter with that gun. My .45 is chambered and the barrel is rifled (i know because I rifled it) for hydroshock bullets which will put a hole the size of a grapefruit in a person. That person will be lucky if they survive one round and certainly not two in an intense situation. If I had time to aim they won't last a single round.. the M&P is much harder to aim and the target would have opportunity to shoot back regardless. So proposing the banning of the M&P assault rifle accomplishes absolutely nothing because the 10 rounds in the .45 would be much more devastating.

This is what happens when you have someone that knows nothing about guns talking about gun control. And M16 is perfectly legal to own if you want to go through the lengthy and expensive process of owning it. It will cost about $4000 and it will take about 6 months to make happen but it can be done. What person who is intent on doing a mass shooting will go through that process? You have no business talking about gun control because you have no knowledge at all of guns.

This is what is frustrating to gun owners.. People like you that are clueless when it comes to such things discussing them like you actually know what you're talking about.


Guns, gods, gays. . . .three things that are guaranteed to generate lots of posts unhampered by any sort of progress
 
2013-01-26 04:39:56 PM
Not sure how i feel about registering guns. Ive got some.
Im not worried about them being taken away. But i also dont like the idea of being on a list thats not going to help prevent crime.
 
2013-01-26 04:40:12 PM

nekom: The government doesn't know about my gun.  I didn't pluralize that, I only have one shotgun that was given to me years ago.  I'm not gun nut, in fact I am fully in favor of an aggressive ban on assault weapons, but the government doesn't need to know about ANYTHING that is within my private property.


Would that include a ton of TNT or hazardous waste?
 
2013-01-26 04:40:14 PM
Just keep this in mind.. Dipshiats that know nothing about guns who are participating in gun control and legislation conversations  Who have no idea that guns are already tracked and SNs are already tagged with your name and DL#. You may ban your so called "assault rifles" because you have no idea how guns work but this will always be legal and you won't have a problem with it because you don't even know what the fark it is.

world.guns.ru
 
2013-01-26 04:40:25 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: Only criminals have something to hide.


Yea, law abiding citizens don't deserve privacy. What the hell is wrong with them?
 
2013-01-26 04:40:36 PM

NewportBarGuy: And when you call the cops to report a break-in and they see your unregistered gun, you get to go to jail and become someone's wife.



What magical land do you live in where the cops come to your house right away when you report a robbery? Everywhere I've lived, they take the report over the phone, give me the report number, and tell me to turn it in to my insurance. In a few jurisdictions, they allow you to file a report online with no police interaction whatsoever.
 
2013-01-26 04:41:18 PM
I would hope that if any of these guns that "don't exist" are eventually stolen and used in a crime, the original gun owner is charged with the same crimes as the perp.

If the gun is used in a murder, may they be put to death.
 
2013-01-26 04:41:44 PM

Fark It: If there's one constant in the gun control debate it's that the people who support bans and confiscation will always, without fail, overreach.


Because according to gun nuts ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING IS OVERREACHING.  It's REGISTRATION, NOT banning or confiscating.  Some of us don't support bans or confiscating and still see no f--king reason why registration and background checks for everyone and reasonable restrictions are SO GODDAMNED OFFENSIVE TO SUGGEST.

Hell, even DISCUSSING guns was called overreaching ("too soon!!!").

GodDAMN I'm sick of it.
 
2013-01-26 04:43:00 PM

Vodka Zombie: Meh. I don't really see how requiring firearms to be registered is all that big of a deal.


It is if you believe they will come around and confiscate them eventually. A lot of people would like to see it happen.
 
2013-01-26 04:43:26 PM

xynix: WHHHAAARRGGGBBLLLEEEE

world.guns.ru


wow that sure fires a lot of lipstick

is that for an LGBT rally?
 
2013-01-26 04:44:41 PM

vpb: xynix: You don't look silly at all you just look like a moron. Cars and motorcycles are not in the constitution FYI.

I always wondered how things look through the eyes of someone who thinks that assault weapons are in the constitution and who is a criminal.

Honest law abiding people will register their firearms, criminals will not.  An unregistered gun in an incriminating object.  It is very difficult ro prove that someone was going to commit a crime in the future, but possession of an unregistered firearm is easy to prove.

A criminal (like you for instance) who caries an unregistered firearm has a chance of bring arrested for a firearms violation, hopefully before they shoot up a school.

It also helps separate the sane from the insane.  The sort of paranoids who think that the 2nd amendment was intended help them become terrorists to overthrow the government if it tries to take their guns are the very people who shouldn't be allowed to have guns.  Basically the sort of people who admit on the internet that they plan to commit felonies if they don't get their way (like you did).

So, yes, registering guns could reduce crime by a good bit, even without a ban on the more dangerous sorts of gun.


sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-01-26 04:45:09 PM

AcneVulgaris: Vodka Zombie: Meh. I don't really see how requiring firearms to be registered is all that big of a deal.

It is if you believe they will come around and confiscate them eventually. A lot of people would like to see it happen.


tighten yer tinfoil Larry...
 
2013-01-26 04:45:25 PM
"legal firearms owners"

affordablehousinginstitute.org
 
2013-01-26 04:45:34 PM

xynix: Just keep this in mind.. Dipshiats that know nothing about guns who are participating in gun control and legislation conversations  Who have no idea that guns are already tracked and SNs are already tagged with your name and DL#. You may ban your so called "assault rifles" because you have no idea how guns work but this will always be legal and you won't have a problem with it because you don't even know what the fark it is.

[world.guns.ru image 575x309]


It's be great if we got some people that actually knew a lot about the firearms industry and culture to play a part in the legislation, but all that seems to happen is the NRA runs around with fingers in their ears shouting "COLD DEAD HANDS".

Maybe if the NRA spent more time doing legitimate work, we might have better legislation, or the ability to prosecute the laws already on the books, or hell, a head at the ATF.
 
2013-01-26 04:45:41 PM
BS of A : There's been another shooting. Let's discuss.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd2XHegWYlg&list=UUHvN4QpSbAvCjA4cVpeS D Ug&index=20
 
2013-01-26 04:45:43 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-26 04:46:25 PM

AcneVulgaris: Vodka Zombie: Meh. I don't really see how requiring firearms to be registered is all that big of a deal.

It is if you believe they will come around and confiscate them eventually. A lot of people would like to see it happen.


It already has happened. It's not like people are inventing a hypothetical bogeyman, they are simply noting precedent.
 
2013-01-26 04:46:41 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: vpb: xynix: You don't look silly at all you just look like a moron. Cars and motorcycles are not in the constitution FYI.

I always wondered how things look through the eyes of someone who thinks that assault weapons are in the constitution and who is a criminal.

Honest law abiding people will register their firearms, criminals will not.  An unregistered gun in an incriminating object.  It is very difficult ro prove that someone was going to commit a crime in the future, but possession of an unregistered firearm is easy to prove.

A criminal (like you for instance) who caries an unregistered firearm has a chance of bring arrested for a firearms violation, hopefully before they shoot up a school.

It also helps separate the sane from the insane.  The sort of paranoids who think that the 2nd amendment was intended help them become terrorists to overthrow the government if it tries to take their guns are the very people who shouldn't be allowed to have guns.  Basically the sort of people who admit on the internet that they plan to commit felonies if they don't get their way (like you did).

So, yes, registering guns could reduce crime by a good bit, even without a ban on the more dangerous sorts of gun.

[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 480x361]


You think *blank* will obey *blank* laws?
Murderers do not obey laws.
Speeders do not obey laws.
Thieves do not obey laws.
Embezzlers do not obey laws.
Conclusion: there should be no laws at all.
 
2013-01-26 04:46:44 PM
I love the fact that all the so-called "law abiding" gun owners in this thread are proving the point of the anti-gun crowd. They're all ready to commit weapon offenses, citing the constitution, over a law that in no way infringes upon their right to keep or bear arms.

It's a shame they didn't make it a felony rather than a misdemeanor. That would deal with the problem in a much more final way.
 
2013-01-26 04:46:50 PM

Alphakronik: I would hope that if any of these guns that "don't exist" are eventually stolen and used in a crime, the original gun owner is charged with the same crimes as the perp.

If the gun is used in a murder, may they be put to death.


How would they know who the original owner was?
 
2013-01-26 04:46:59 PM
Let's see, all these minutemen 'patriots' are at war with pro-lifers, black leaders, black people, gays, Mexicans, muslins, women, or basically anyone who isn't European Christian ancestry.

Now they want a piece of the United States Government.

Let's see how well they do.
 
2013-01-26 04:47:04 PM
If they choose not to follow part of the law, they're not law-abiding.
 
2013-01-26 04:47:06 PM
Are they signing up with the National Registry of Arms?
 
2013-01-26 04:47:11 PM

vpb: xynix: True story.. I'm a gun owner and I will never register my gun with any agency.. state or federal. I'm not going to be forced to do something criminals don't have to do. The government can go fark themselves.

Another criminal with access to guns.

You should really move somewhere where they don't have government.  Like the tribal areas of Pakistan or Somalia.  You can be all Mad Max there.


In what way does limited gov't equal no gov't? You don't see Libertarians suggest leftists live in Best Korea...
 
2013-01-26 04:47:15 PM

Chariset: Fark It: If there's one constant in the gun control debate it's that the people who support bans and confiscation will always, without fail, overreach.

Sure.  What's a school full of dead children compared to your personal momentary inconvenience?


You people are such idiots. If you'd just read a little history you'd realize that the problem isn't the guns. It's the farking crazy people. If you take the guns away they'll go back to using bombs or whatever else they can get their hands on.
 
2013-01-26 04:47:20 PM
I don't own a flash-suppressed AR-15 modified to fire semi or full auto with an extended magazine, reflex sight, and fingerprint-resistant grip, so there's no reason to register it. Try to prove otherwise.
 
2013-01-26 04:47:37 PM

carnifex2005: [i.imgur.com image 179x281]


this
 
2013-01-26 04:48:22 PM

vpb: Amos Quito: There. See how silly you look?

No.  Do I look as silly as someone who thinks playing with their toys and not having to register them like a car or a motorcycle is more important than preventing mass shootings?


You don't have to register a car if it never leaves your property...
 
2013-01-26 04:48:22 PM
Fine with me. This way any shootings, even in self defense, will likely be done with illegally owned fire arms and open the shooter up to even more legal problems.
Justified shooting? Maybe but it was done with an illegal firearm so enjoy your jail time.
 
Displayed 50 of 1301 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report