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.

(Chicago Trib)   Chicago, with the nation's strictest gun laws, would like to point out that 1 of the 7 homicides last night was a stabbing. No gun was used in that killing   (chicagotribune.com) divider line 451
    More: Sad, Chicago, stabbing, homicides, gun laws, stab wound, Chicago Police Department, Englewood  
•       •       •

4559 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jan 2013 at 12:30 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-27 04:12:32 PM  

MagicMissile: If you don't agree with the 2nd Amendment, then get out of the United States. Go move to Canada or Europe.


Fun test to ask conservatives.

1) What is the 2nd amendment about?

2) What are the other 9 about?
 
2013-01-27 04:13:00 PM  

Greylight: I care about your mental health too!
We're not out to grab you guns, we're trying to have a discussion about how to balance society safety with gun ownership. You can be a valuable part of the discussion, you would be amazed how well people will respond when you don't resort with partisan derp.

Some folks do want to take away all guns, it's true, get over it. It's not the will of all gun control advocates.


I have yet to hear a rational conversation from the other side of this argument.

Rational people would look at the numbers and conclude that banning assault weapons is both the most politically divisive and least effective proposition put on the table to curb gun violence.

Assault rifles are used in less than 2% of all homicides, roughly 120 people a year (out of 8600 firearm homicides). The entirety of this debate is centered around a number of crimes that, in comparison to the rest of the homicide data, is essentially statistical noise. To say nothing of the fact that the vast majority of those murders would still take place had an assault weapon not been used by the perpetrator.

I mean really - you think that some criminal is going to say "You know, I really wanna shoot that guy, but I can't use the particular kinda gun I want... so I'm just gonna go home and play xBox."?

As far as mass shootings, there is absolutely no correlation between the use of an assault rifle and the lethality of the event. The most horrific mass shooting in this nation's history was committed with two pistols (one of them a .22) and 10 round magazines (Virginia Tech). Only 1 out of the 10 most lethal mass shootings in the country involved the use of an assault rifle (Newton) and all the evidence suggests that the kind of weapon used made not one iota of difference in how many kids he shot. The deal is really simple - shooting unarmed, cowering people isn't that difficult a task that requires military hardware.

Having said all that, I would *love* to have a rational conversation about ending gun violence. As someone who knows guns very well, and is intimately familiar with the laws surrounding their purchase, possession and use, I can list off half a dozen ways we could significantly cut down on gun violence in this country.

Unfortunately, not a single thing that I know would work to curb gun violence is actually being discussed at the national political level. Nor has any anti-gun person on this board ever engaged me when I've outlined my ideas. All they do is talk about bans, insult gun owners and marinade in smugness at their own one-liners.
 
2013-01-27 04:16:15 PM  

MagicMissile: If law enforcement started raiding homes for firearms, that is grounds for another revolutionary war, as that is a violation of the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights, Constitution of the United States.

The whole reason the 2nd Amendment was written in the first place is to prevent that from happening in the first place.

I served in the military and I meant it when I swore the oath to protect and defend the Constitution with my life.

I can also tell you that the majority of military and law enforcement wouldn't obey orders to disarm Americans in the fashion you describe.

So I guess you can go buy a lobster and masturbate vigorously with it while you fantasize about Americans being brutalized by their own government. Idiot.


No one is arguing that you shouldn't be able to own firearms. That's a creation of your own paranoid/delusional mind. It's the TYPE of firearms being owned that people take issue with. Buy all the handguns, shotguns, and hunting rifles you can waste you dollars on...be our guest. Buy an AK-47, an Uzi, etc...military weapons meant for military applications...then perhaps you're not mentally stable enough to take on that kind of responsibility.

/lemme guess...the black helicopters visit you often, don't they?
 
2013-01-27 04:20:18 PM  

Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: If you don't agree with the 2nd Amendment, then get out of the United States. Go move to Canada or Europe.

I agree, everyone who disagrees with you should self-deport themselves.

If only you guys gave as much of a shiat about the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights like you guys do for this one.

Well, I served in the military and actually did something with my life because I cared about the "other 9 amendments" you generalizing ass.

I even care about your 1st amendment, and the 1st amendments of the other million drooling retards on this thread and in the country beyond who are going batshiat crazy over the liberal media and governments flavor of the month dilemma.

So you should be able to agree that people have different interpretations and opinons of the 2nd Amendment and that saying that anyone who disagrees with your view of the 2nd Amendment should leave this country was a stupid thing to say then, correct?


I can respect that there may be different opinions regarding the 2nd Amendment, I mean its your right to have and voice opinions.

What I do not agree with are different interpretations. The 2nd Amendment clearly says what it says in plain English. The first part describes the ability for Americans to use freedom of speech to spread word and peacefully assemble into an organized militia, rights granted by the 1st Amendment.

The conundrum here is that English was spoken a little different, and therefore written a little different when the Constitution was written, so its not readily apparent to the untrained eye. But that is absolutely what they were talking about.

The second line states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

This means that under no circumstances shall the peoples right to own and carry firearms be taken away or infringed upon by any legislation whatsoever. They did fully intend for the people to have the same weapons that the government and military has.

Now consider what was going on before the Revolutionary War....... English troops had martial law declared in American Colonies. England had become far detached from American colonial society and simply served as tax collectors off the labor of people who had now become native where as the English were foreign.

They were not allowed free speech, or allowed to own firearms, or were allowed to assemble, and they were forced to give the English lodging. If they complained they were beaten, shot, their wives were raped and so on.

So when they began to describe specific freedoms for every citizen in the newly formed United States.. they did their absolute best to outline that it would be the peoples right to grab firearms, get together and form a militia in the event that a monarchy or other form of tyranny visited our shores again.

Our government was designed to be run by the people, public office was intended to be a public service position. It was not intended to be a permanent career path with high pay as we have now. It was not intended to be full of rogue para military intelligence agencies that are armed to the teeth and up the ass of the American People.

Given changing times and technology, things have had to change and some rightly so. It would not be wise to allow every citizen to have a nuclear missile, or an M1Abrahms tank.

But that basic right to own small arms of any type must be maintained, and the Supreme Court ruled on it twice five and three years ago.

What gets all of us "gun nuts" in an uproar is the fact that the "gun control nuts" simply won't let it go. The gun control crowd wants all firearms banned, they would have us like England, which is the most violent nation in Europe, has a higher per capita crime rate than the United States, and has police and military armed with fully automatic weapons riding around in armored personnel carriers, kicking doors in and raiding homes because they might have a firearm or something else.

Yeah... kinda would be like going backwards, you know what I mean?
 
2013-01-27 04:21:19 PM  

SubBass49: No one is arguing that you shouldn't be able to own firearms. That's a creation of your own paranoid/delusional mind. It's the TYPE of firearms being owned that people take issue with. Buy all the handguns, shotguns, and hunting rifles you can waste you dollars on...be our guest. Buy an AK-47, an Uzi, etc...military weapons meant for military applications...then perhaps you're not mentally stable enough to take on that kind of responsibility.

Every

firearm was originally designed for military use.
 
2013-01-27 04:21:57 PM  

lostcat: You "police state" gun nuts have won me over!

I totally agree with you.

After 40+ years of living peacefully US (just a few years in Vietnam...talk about lack of personal freedom), with nothing more to show for it than a few unpleasant traffic stops, I've decided to start buying guns. Lots of powerful guns.

And the next time a cop looks at me funny I'm going to shoot him in the head.

Then I'll feel like I've really got some freedom from the growing police oppression that is clearly taking place under this socialist/fascist political system we have.


How about not making it an issue of extremes? I wanted to believe people can take you seriously. Please do not buy any guns just to try to win the debate by coloring the other side crazy with your own sickness.
 
2013-01-27 04:23:37 PM  

jaytkay: MagicMissile: If you don't agree with the 2nd Amendment, then get out of the United States. Go move to Canada or Europe.

Fun test to ask conservatives.

1) What is the 2nd amendment about?

2) What are the other 9 about?


That's a fun test for 99% of the general public.  How many people know about the 4th amendment?
 
2013-01-27 04:24:49 PM  
I've been reading these comments all day... I'm sure a few of y'all have noticed mine.
But seriously, folks... is anyone doing the math?
First of all.... one reason gun control hasn't worked in DC, Chicago & Detroit is that it's relatively easy to drive a short distance and legally purchase firearms.... another is that it's only criminals in those areas able to purchase said firearms, through criminal means(like that would matter for a criminal - actually preferable)
I live in an area with "gun culture".
Strangely enough, doing a check of the areas of my city with the most gun incidents and comparing it with areas with areas with registered gun owners (NRA Survey) seems to show that the areas with the most registered gun owners tend to have the lowest crime rates... what's up with that?
I used to live quite near a local "motorcycle club"'s clubhouse... crime rate there was near zero. Nobody there would dare mess with them.
Kind of similar to those areas of Staten Island populated by "legitimate businessmen"
You don't know if they're packing, but do you really want to take a chance?
 
2013-01-27 04:25:26 PM  

dr-shotgun: [Several hundred words about my superior attitude and knowledge]


Gee, all those irrational liberals fail to address the calm, intelligent suggestions about gun violence which you failed to make.
 
2013-01-27 04:26:16 PM  
Is this another thread where gun nuts prove that they are just regular nuts, but with guns?

/Lunatics shouldn't be able to own guns.
 
2013-01-27 04:26:27 PM  

jaytkay: Gee, all those irrational liberals fail to address the calm, intelligent suggestions about gun violence which you failed to make.


I've made them multiple times on here (not in this thread). Every time I spend the time typing them all out, the irrational liberals are nothing but crickets. Why bother?
 
2013-01-27 04:26:38 PM  

dr-shotgun: All they do is talk about bans, insult gun owners and marinade in smugness at their own one-liners.


Well it is Fark.
 
2013-01-27 04:26:55 PM  

dr-shotgun: SubBass49: No one is arguing that you shouldn't be able to own firearms. That's a creation of your own paranoid/delusional mind. It's the TYPE of firearms being owned that people take issue with. Buy all the handguns, shotguns, and hunting rifles you can waste you dollars on...be our guest. Buy an AK-47, an Uzi, etc...military weapons meant for military applications...then perhaps you're not mentally stable enough to take on that kind of responsibility.

Every firearm was originally designed for military use.


But yet many are not used in that capacity anymore. Otherwise, we'd see more photos of our troops cleaning sand out of their muskets in Afghanistan.
 
2013-01-27 04:27:21 PM  
dr-shotgun: I don't completely agree with you, but thank you for adding a bit of logic to this discussion
 
2013-01-27 04:27:23 PM  

SubBass49: MagicMissile: If law enforcement started raiding homes for firearms, that is grounds for another revolutionary war, as that is a violation of the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights, Constitution of the United States.

The whole reason the 2nd Amendment was written in the first place is to prevent that from happening in the first place.

I served in the military and I meant it when I swore the oath to protect and defend the Constitution with my life.

I can also tell you that the majority of military and law enforcement wouldn't obey orders to disarm Americans in the fashion you describe.

So I guess you can go buy a lobster and masturbate vigorously with it while you fantasize about Americans being brutalized by their own government. Idiot.

No one is arguing that you shouldn't be able to own firearms. That's a creation of your own paranoid/delusional mind. It's the TYPE of firearms being owned that people take issue with. Buy all the handguns, shotguns, and hunting rifles you can waste you dollars on...be our guest. Buy an AK-47, an Uzi, etc...military weapons meant for military applications...then perhaps you're not mentally stable enough to take on that kind of responsibility.

/lemme guess...the black helicopters visit you often, don't they?


Once again, who are YOU to decide what I or anyone else owns? Exactly what gives YOU the right? I guess you should be able to tell me I can't have a GT500KR that will go 200MPH either? A Ford Focus will get me where I am going just as good, right?

Think about this, smart guy- If you own an AR15, and you leave it on your closet or gun safe, it will sit there, day after day, week after week, year after year , and not do a goddamned thing, ever, until you pick it up and make a decision what to do with it. Cloud the issue all you want, but the bottom line is it's the person holding the gun, either a criminal or mentally ill person, that needs to be addressed, not the inanimate object that can do nothing on it's own.
 
2013-01-27 04:29:48 PM  
Anyone who thinks we need to go down the path of bans and criminalizing gun owners should watch this charming video from the UK. In it, a police task force combs over Facebook and Twitter posts, sussing out people who have :gasp: posed with knives and other offensive weapons!

Watch a bunch of people in uniform get absolutely apoplectic over someone with an old kitchen knife! See a man arrested because of a picture of him on Facebook with a stick!

UK Facebook Knife Crime Task Force
 
2013-01-27 04:30:05 PM  

Mrtraveler01: earthworm2.0: Mrtraveler01: EvilByte: Chicago is the NRA's straw man. Chicago's murder rate is about 16th in the nation for the roughly 70 cities with more than 250,000 people. Miami, Cleveland, Memphis, Atlanta, and New Orleans all have higher homicide rates. But since Chicago has 2,000,000 more people than those gun loving cities the raw number of homicides is higher.

And they can't use NYC because crime there is at a record low.

I live in St. Louis so I always laugh when I hear about crime problems plaguing a city that's 3 times as big in area.

St. Louis.... Where even the mayor gets mugged.

I have a love/hate relationship with this city.


I'm only here because I have nowhere else to go. I hate this place, and if I had a nuke, I'd use it .... Friggen arm pit of the united states....
 
2013-01-27 04:31:58 PM  

3StratMan: Greylight:
/hug

I care about your mental health too!
We're not out to grab you guns, we're trying t ...

So you are admitting it then- gun control is your thing. Not protecting children, which was the original point that started the whole argument a month ago. "Balance society safety/safely with gun ownership", as you put it. So basically more gun control is something you have wanted all along, with Sandy Hook conveniently being the mechanism to get the ball rolling. Gotcha. That's even better.


Oh my, you're really feeling pursecuted arn't you!

This may blow your mind but the majority of people including myself want to protect our children. The majority of folks also see that one means to do that is through laws and regulations. The majority of folks want to balance protecting children and gun ownership.

I think you're too vested in one facet of this discussion to see that there are more then two opinions in conflict. Until you can, you will also not see that there are many different opinions on what laws and restrictions can look like.

You can add much as a thoughtful contributor to the discussion by stepping back from the rhetoric a little.

Refusal to even explore the options of new or revamped laws and regulations does not mean you don't care about protecting children, I know that. It does mean you consider your interpretation of your rights to be more important. Sad.
 
2013-01-27 04:32:13 PM  

earthworm2.0: Mrtraveler01: earthworm2.0: Mrtraveler01: EvilByte: Chicago is the NRA's straw man. Chicago's murder rate is about 16th in the nation for the roughly 70 cities with more than 250,000 people. Miami, Cleveland, Memphis, Atlanta, and New Orleans all have higher homicide rates. But since Chicago has 2,000,000 more people than those gun loving cities the raw number of homicides is higher.

And they can't use NYC because crime there is at a record low.

I live in St. Louis so I always laugh when I hear about crime problems plaguing a city that's 3 times as big in area.

St. Louis.... Where even the mayor gets mugged.

I have a love/hate relationship with this city.

I'm only here because I have nowhere else to go. I hate this place, and if I had a nuke, I'd use it .... Friggen arm pit of the united states....


Take a trip down I-55.

Places like Memphis and Jackson, MS make St. Louis look like a cosmopolitan utopia compared to them.
 
2013-01-27 04:33:18 PM  

3StratMan: Once again, who are YOU to decide what I or anyone else owns? Exactly what gives YOU the right? I guess you should be able to tell me I can't have a GT500KR that will go 200MPH either? A Ford Focus will get me where I am going just as good, right?

Think about this, smart guy- If you own an AR15, and you leave it on your closet or gun safe, it will sit there, day after day, week after week, year after year , and not do a goddamned thing, ever, until you pick it up and make a decision what to do with it. Cloud the issue all you want, but the bottom line is it's the person holding the gun, either a criminal or mentally ill person, that needs to be addressed, not the inanimate object that can do nothing on it's own.


Once again, I'm not the one making that choice for you...never would be. I'm not a politician/legislator. You want a fast car? Cool...go for it...waste every dollar you can on it. Doesn't mean it's street-legal. Last time I checked, you couldn't drive a formula-1 racer on the freeway. Oh yeah...forgot about that whole "regulation" thing that applies to vehicles, huh? Don't feel bad...you almost made a point there.

Regardless, I never stated that limitations on types of weapons would be a stand-alone cure. I think NOBODY here is making that case. Obviously mental health issues should be addressed as well. Amusing though that the people working to fight against additional funding for mental health care in this nation also seem to be the very same fighting AGAINST additional gun regulations...but maybe that tidbit is just coincidental.

Keep calm and carry your artificial phallus.
 
2013-01-27 04:33:48 PM  
Hey...can anybody illuminate me as to the truth here...? I've heard 2 different versions of the Newtown massacre... one says he used an AR-15 assault rifle, and another says the rifle was left in the trunk and he used handguns to do the killing.
Personally, I think it was all done with the handguns, since a long gun is pretty crappy in close quarters... on the other hand, it might have been useable since there was no effective resistance.
Oh, and BTW, no guns were involved in the worst school massacre in US history.
 
2013-01-27 04:37:25 PM  
MagicMissile....
Here ya go:
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

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.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
 
2013-01-27 04:37:28 PM  

DogBoyTheCat: Hey...can anybody illuminate me as to the truth here...? I've heard 2 different versions of the Newtown massacre... one says he used an AR-15 assault rifle, and another says the rifle was left in the trunk and he used handguns to do the killing.
Personally, I think it was all done with the handguns, since a long gun is pretty crappy in close quarters... on the other hand, it might have been useable since there was no effective resistance.
Oh, and BTW, no guns were involved in the worst school massacre in US history.


I remember hearing a shotgun was taken out of the trunk and the AR was recovered inside the school and the coroner said that many of the wounds were from the AR.  Only recently has there been a change in this.
 
2013-01-27 04:39:23 PM  

bronyaur1: The NRA dummies keep pounding the pathetic argument that because Chicago has bad gun violence problems and its leaders have pursued gun restrictions, therefore the pursuit of gun restrictions causes gun violence.

If you are so dumb and incapable of logical thought that you sign onto - let alone repeat talking points supporting - this argument, then you might just be (a) too stupid to breed, (b) a Fox viewer, and (c) a redneck.


No, dummy, they're saying the strict gun laws in Chicago aren't stopping the Libtards from shooting each other there. That being the case, you would think the GOP would want stricter gun laws in the Libtard bastions, just to cut down on the Libtard vote.
 
2013-01-27 04:39:27 PM  

DogBoyTheCat: Hey...can anybody illuminate me as to the truth here...? I've heard 2 different versions of the Newtown massacre... one says he used an AR-15 assault rifle, and another says the rifle was left in the trunk and he used handguns to do the killing.
Personally, I think it was all done with the handguns, since a long gun is pretty crappy in close quarters... on the other hand, it might have been useable since there was no effective resistance.
Oh, and BTW, no guns were involved in the worst school massacre in US history.


While there were some initial reports that the AR-15 was left in the car, they were false. All the victims at the school were shot with a Bushmaster XM-15, legally purchased and owned by his mother. She was shot with a .22 before he stole the other weapons (2 handguns, a Glock and Sig, a shotgun and the Bushmaster).

Having said that, he was in the school for 10 minutes. He fired less than 100 rounds and changed magazines multiple times. Most of the discarded magazines were found to contain a large number of remaining rounds. The pattern of evidence indicates that all of the "rapid fire, mass killing" properties of an AR-15 that the folks trying to ban them like constantly yammering on about had absolutely no effect on his lethality. An average rate of fire of 10 rounds a minute is hardly that of a machine gun. Combined with the large number of magazine changes, it is obvious that the act could have been carried out with any number of other types of firearms.
 
2013-01-27 04:40:39 PM  

DogBoyTheCat: Hey...can anybody illuminate me as to the truth here...? I've heard 2 different versions of the Newtown massacre... one says he used an AR-15 assault rifle, and another says the rifle was left in the trunk and he used handguns to do the killing.
Personally, I think it was all done with the handguns, since a long gun is pretty crappy in close quarters... on the other hand, it might have been useable since there was no effective resistance.
Oh, and BTW, no guns were involved in the worst school massacre in US history.


He used one and it jammed almost immediately. He abandoned it and switched to handguns with extra magazines he carried with him.
 
2013-01-27 04:41:30 PM  

3StratMan: Gun grab, power grab, and money grab- all rolled into one. Liberals at their finest.


The Party of Zero Responsibility: Conservatives at their finest.
 
2013-01-27 04:42:21 PM  

DogBoyTheCat: MagicMissile....


pointless post is pointless

 
2013-01-27 04:43:14 PM  
SubBass49: Amusing though that the people working to fight against additional funding for mental health care in this nation also seem to be the very same fighting AGAINST additional gun regulations...but maybe that tidbit is just coincidental.

.

Really, and who would that be? Oh wait, by saying "mental health care", you are actually meaning Obamacare. In which case you are right and wrong at the same time. Wrong because no one anywhere would argue against better care for the mentally ill, and right because most people are totally against the inadequate, overpriced POS abomination that is Obamacare.
 
2013-01-27 04:45:01 PM  

Tumunga: No, dummy, they're saying the strict gun laws in Chicago aren't stopping the Libtards from shooting each other there.


Cuz teenage gang members are so politically active.
 
2013-01-27 04:47:36 PM  

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: 3StratMan: Gun grab, power grab, and money grab- all rolled into one. Liberals at their finest.

The Party of Zero Responsibility: Conservatives at their finest.


You're right. I don't know how they got away with Fast And Furious and Benghazi. Those damned conservatives. The nerve.
 
2013-01-27 04:47:55 PM  

3StratMan: right because most people are totally against the inadequate, overpriced POS abomination that is Obamacare


How'd that last election go again, Karl?
 
2013-01-27 04:49:26 PM  

3StratMan: You're right. I don't know how they got away with Fast And Furious and Benghazi. Those damned conservatives. The nerve.


Oh, my apologies, I thought I was having a discussion with an adult. Never mind.
 
2013-01-27 04:50:34 PM  

Steve McQueen's Motorcycle: Greylight: do you have a problem with special licensing requirements?

Yes, I have a problem with licensing


Can you come to a mutal agreed point that there are some weapons that should be resticted? I bet you can, then you can add value to the discussion by pointing out where to draw that line. Put your ass in the game instead of just critisizing choice of language. It's pendantic and appears to be designed to obfuscate the issue intentionally.

Some firearms require special licences to purchase and posses. That is not the same thing as a ban, or takeing awaty all guns from folks. If laws and regulations are proposed that require a special permit for some weapons designated as "assault weapons" would you contribute to the discussion your ideas on how that should be framed or are you going to simply belittle and critisize?
 
2013-01-27 04:50:49 PM  
This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

( the problem is that we aren't red or blue, we aren't only conservatives or liberals, and your rights are my rights. If I lose you lose. Stop watching and believing the media, think for yourself question authority, read a book, use your brain for once, be independent /thread )
 
2013-01-27 04:51:34 PM  
You know... I've been doing a little research on guns in the 1770s
It was the Americans who had the most rifled-barrel long arms at the time of the revolution.... ostensibly for hunting, they took a little longer to load but were much more accurate at a longer range. That, combined with the British tactic of lining up in the open in bright red jackets certainly helped win things for our side.
Combine this with the 1773 tax act, which allowed British troops to search any home for weapons, and confiscate them, I can see where our founding fathers wanted the ability to shoot back if things got ugly.
And, you know what? I'm cool with that.
 
2013-01-27 04:51:58 PM  

MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.


It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.
 
2013-01-27 04:52:42 PM  

3StratMan: Wrong because no one anywhere would argue against better care for the mentally ill


Until it's time for a state to cut its budget that is.
 
2013-01-27 04:52:59 PM  

Steve McQueen's Motorcycle: He used one and it jammed almost immediately. He abandoned it and switched to handguns with extra magazines he carried with him.


Most of the victims at Newton were shot with the Bushmaster. I believe the only use of the handguns was the self-inflicted GSW on the shooter when he offed himself.

The Aurora theater shooter's S&W M&P jammed during his initial shots into the ceiling. He dropped the weapon and switched to the Glock and Remington shotgun he carried. IIRC, most of the actual GSWs and injured victims were hit with the shotgun pellets. Also, he used one of those notoriously unreliable 100 round drum magazines in the S&W.

Also, the Clackamas mall shooter (just a few days before Newton) used a Bushmaster that also jammed on him. While it has been under-reported (likely because Newton occurred just as the story was coming out), a CCW permit holder engaged the guy but did not fire. This is why he ran to the service corridors of the mall and shot himself just as Clackamas Sheriff's Deputies were about to bust down the door on him.

Honestly, we would be best off if we *mandated* every mass shooter use the 100 round drum. Those things are jam-o-matics. The Army tried to get them to work for years with little success and the Marines took another swing at them for the M27 ITR rifle program with zero success.
 
2013-01-27 04:53:08 PM  

Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.


must be fun being a whiny biatch
 
2013-01-27 04:54:42 PM  

MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.

must be fun being a whiny biatch


Oh snap. I just got told.

Sorry, I wont' ruin your strawman building then.
 
2013-01-27 04:56:38 PM  

Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.

must be fun being a whiny biatch

Oh snap. I just got told.

Sorry, I wont' ruin your strawman building then.


I think you just like to insult people and be passive aggressive and that you have nothing interesting to add to any conversation period.
 
2013-01-27 04:57:30 PM  

MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.

must be fun being a whiny biatch

Oh snap. I just got told.

Sorry, I wont' ruin your strawman building then.

I think you just like to insult people and be passive aggressive and that you have nothing interesting to add to any conversation period.


Well when people get paranoid and think the whole world is out to get them, how can I resist?
 
2013-01-27 04:58:22 PM  

Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.

must be fun being a whiny biatch

Oh snap. I just got told.

Sorry, I wont' ruin your strawman building then.

I think you just like to insult people and be passive aggressive and that you have nothing interesting to add to any conversation period.

Well when people get paranoid and think the whole world is out to get them, how can I resist?


way to prove my point
 
2013-01-27 04:58:26 PM  

MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.

must be fun being a whiny biatch

Oh snap. I just got told.

Sorry, I wont' ruin your strawman building then.

I think you just like to insult people and be passive aggressive and that you have nothing interesting to add to any conversation period.


I also forgot the obligatory "Welcome to Fark.jpg

/too lazy to find it though
 
2013-01-27 04:59:27 PM  

dr-shotgun: Also, the Clackamas mall shooter ...While it has been under-reported...a CCW permit holder engaged the guy but did not fire...This is why he ran to the service corridors of the mall and shot himself


It's true cuz I saw it in the NRA newsletters and the fw:fw:fw:fw:fw:fw:fw: emails from my uncle.

Also the shooter asked a girl if she believed in God and shot her cuz she said yes.
 
2013-01-27 05:00:51 PM  

MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.

It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.

must be fun being a whiny biatch

Oh snap. I just got told.

Sorry, I wont' ruin your strawman building then.

I think you just like to insult people and be passive aggressive and that you have nothing interesting to add to any conversation period.

Well when people get paranoid and think the whole world is out to get them, how can I resist?

way to prove my point


It's hard for me to take people seriously when they think that liberals want to ban guns entirely and want police to storm into people's homes and take their guns away.

I understand that people want to keep them for self-defense and all that, but I can't take people seriously when they make outlandish claims on how liberals in the liberal media are conspiring to take people guns away.

Try sounding less paranoid and I can start taking you seriously.
 
2013-01-27 05:03:19 PM  

Mrtraveler01: earthworm2.0: Mrtraveler01: earthworm2.0: Mrtraveler01: EvilByte: Chicago is the NRA's straw man. Chicago's murder rate is about 16th in the nation for the roughly 70 cities with more than 250,000 people. Miami, Cleveland, Memphis, Atlanta, and New Orleans all have higher homicide rates. But since Chicago has 2,000,000 more people than those gun loving cities the raw number of homicides is higher.

And they can't use NYC because crime there is at a record low.

I live in St. Louis so I always laugh when I hear about crime problems plaguing a city that's 3 times as big in area.

St. Louis.... Where even the mayor gets mugged.

I have a love/hate relationship with this city.

I'm only here because I have nowhere else to go. I hate this place, and if I had a nuke, I'd use it .... Friggen arm pit of the united states....

Take a trip down I-55.

Places like Memphis and Jackson, MS make St. Louis look like a cosmopolitan utopia compared to them.


I vacation in blairsville GA, drove through those towns you speak of. They still smelled better than East StL, and the people seemed nicer. I think its something in our resivior(sp) water system ... You get 20 miles outside of town and the mood changes... But in town.... I only stay to be with family. You stay over in the Chuck, which has its own severe heroin problem, but I'm in the city, berkley/bel ridge area now.... And I swear its all bad....
 
2013-01-27 05:03:47 PM  
OK.... finally... (for a while)
In regards to Chicago, Detroit & DC's gun ban not working...
and the cultural makeup of the city...
Is anybody familiar with James Watson's (of Crick & Watson... the dudes who found the structure of DNA) work on racial intelligence?
Admittedly, it's based on wide percentages, rather than individual cases, but...

(You know, it really sucks to bring it up... I know I'll be labeled a racist, but I'm only quoting a reputed source)

(BTW.... for those who want to scream "racist" at me, I'm technically less white than the president)
 
2013-01-27 05:04:18 PM  

MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: Mrtraveler01: MagicMissile: This whole argument has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting control. The government desires control, the libtards desire to lash out at a group of people that the media has told them are bad and so therefore have been molded to support the government in the process of a massive power grab.

We have been painted red or blue with one color fighting the other. There is no middle ground, there are no other opinions other than what the media tells you.

This is how a libtard thinks.


It must be fun to have a persecution complex like that.

must be fun being a whiny biatch

Oh snap. I just got told.

Sorry, I wont' ruin your strawman building then.

I think you just like to insult people and be passive aggressive and that you have nothing interesting to add to any conversation period.


Says the guy who made that ridiculous strawman.

Seriously, if you want to be taken seriously, stop saying outlandish things.
 
Displayed 50 of 451 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report