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.

(CBC)   Meanwhile, in the gun-free utopia of Canada   (cbc.ca) divider line 164
    More: Scary, Vancouver Police, Vancouver, stabbing  
•       •       •

14391 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Feb 2013 at 5:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-02-01 09:46:21 PM
Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?
 
2013-02-01 11:51:14 PM
Canada needs to ban high-capacity knives.
 
2013-02-01 11:52:12 PM
he sounds stabby.
 
2013-02-02 12:03:58 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?


You've never seen the aftermath of a knife attack, have you.

There's a reason the "coup de grace" was invented.
 
2013-02-02 12:04:15 AM
Six people - three men and three women - were taken to hospital for treatment. Two have since been released but four people remain in hospital, one in critical condition. A seventh victim and a police officer were treated at the scene. The victims range in age from their 20s to their 60s.

Canadians are pussies...if that happened in America, there'd be way more victims, and they'd all be dead.

Because the 2nd Amendment keeps us safe.
 
2013-02-02 12:14:54 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?


It's not 12 or more commie.
 
2013-02-02 12:16:09 AM
Living with Queen Elizabeth's boot heel on his throat made him all stabby.
 
2013-02-02 12:16:57 AM
That's no way to spread freedom
 
2013-02-02 12:20:27 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?

 
2013-02-02 12:24:52 AM
If the people he attacked had been carrying knives themselves, this wouldn't have been a problem.
 
2013-02-02 12:28:28 AM
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Those poor people.  I hope they recover quickly
 
2013-02-02 01:48:55 AM
 
2013-02-02 01:49:55 AM
 
2013-02-02 01:59:38 AM
All six victims were poutine the hospital.
 
2013-02-02 02:34:26 AM
Four counts of aggravated assault.
Four counts of assault with a weapon.
Three counts of common assault.
One count of assaulting a peace officer.
♫ and a knife blade in a cavity ♫
 
2013-02-02 02:45:37 AM
Clearly Canada needs to ban assault knives.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-02 03:18:05 AM
A real hero would have used their own knife to stop the maniac.
 
2013-02-02 05:19:54 AM
All victims taken to the hospital for socialized medicine. THE HORROR. Or not.
 
2013-02-02 05:50:14 AM
I'm sure those people feel safer knowing that if they carry a gun they'd get a longer sentence than the attacker.

Mean while, in New York
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTdhVxva5KU
 
2013-02-02 05:52:39 AM

Pocket Ninja: If the people he attacked had been carrying knives themselves, this wouldn't have been a problem.


National Sharp Object Association says that the only way to be sure is to let them also wield swords.
 
2013-02-02 05:53:50 AM
It's funny when people who aren't American think anyone cares about their news...
 
2013-02-02 05:54:33 AM
Meanwhile, in the gun-free utopia of Canada  ...A guy went nuts and injured five people. I
 
2013-02-02 05:55:59 AM

LordJiro: Meanwhile, in the gun-free utopia of Canada  ...A guy went nuts and injured five people. I


FFS, why did that send before I finished it. *Ahem*

In America, that same guy would probably have injured or killed at least twice that.
 
2013-02-02 05:56:30 AM
Now if any of those victims had been armed with a gun, the stabber would be dead now. And clearly that would be better. For some reason.
 
2013-02-02 05:56:46 AM

LordJiro: Meanwhile, in the gun-free utopia of Canada  ...A guy went nuts and injured five people. I


After which he received hugs and cookies, cause he had a bad day.
 
2013-02-02 06:02:06 AM

Gyrfalcon: Now if any of those victims had been armed with a gun, the stabber would be dead now. And clearly that would be better. For some reason.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-02 06:03:00 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?


Ok, we're STARTING the thread with someone that missed the point completely....
 
2013-02-02 06:04:39 AM
Subby is a moron. There are plenty of guns in Canada. We just have fewer nutcases who feel it's their God-given right to kill a bunch of people for no apparent reason.
 
2013-02-02 06:10:49 AM
Oh hey look. Everyone survived someone being a crazy asshole.


If only they all had guns this would have never happened.


And by that I mean several people would certainly be dead.
 
2013-02-02 06:12:28 AM

crab66: Oh hey look. Everyone survived someone being a crazy asshole.


If only they all had guns this would have never happened.


And by that I mean several people would certainly be dead.


Preferably the attacker.  If the first victim would have sprayed the walls with the attacker's brains it would have saved a few victims and the cost of a trial.
 
2013-02-02 06:15:05 AM

Elegy: Clearly Canada needs to ban assault knives.


I must find one of those. Its like taking a crowbar with a scope to a whole new level of awesome...
 
2013-02-02 06:21:30 AM
What's the Canadian mental health care system like?
 
2013-02-02 06:24:26 AM
V-neck t and half a fauxhawk. Clearly he couldn't deal with his douche bag anymore.
 
2013-02-02 06:27:26 AM

maram500: Elegy: Clearly Canada needs to ban assault knives.

I must find one of those. Its like taking a crowbar with a scope to a whole new level of awesome...


You can make more guns like that on pimpmygun's website. There's a thread every now and then on 4Chan about the knifiest gun possible.
 
2013-02-02 06:35:31 AM
Why is it that most gun nuts sound like exactly the kind of people who should be on a "mentally ill-should not be allowed to own guns" list?
 
2013-02-02 06:35:44 AM
People get beheaded and eaten on Greyhounds in Canada.
 
2013-02-02 06:36:01 AM
Oh yeah? Check out this Canadian cut...

funnycrave.frsucrave.netdna-cdn.com

No, that's not missing a letter.


/Moose knuckle
 
ows
2013-02-02 06:36:16 AM
oh man, just glad it wasn't a sharpened hockey stick ay.
 
2013-02-02 06:37:06 AM

Old enough to know better: What's the Canadian mental health care system like?


Depends on the province as they are mostly in charge of setting health policy. They use federal money (less every year it seems) but they control thir healthcare. Mental health services are not as widely available as they should be but there are still limited options and you can always pay for your own care if you can afford it. Usually the difference is wait time and less one one one care. Socialized mental health options usually tend more towards group therapy and longer wait times.
 
2013-02-02 06:38:29 AM

ows: oh man, just glad it wasn't a sharpened hockey stick ay.


It's 'eh' you heathen.
 
2013-02-02 06:57:09 AM

illannoyin: Oh yeah? Check out this Canadian cut...

[funnycrave.frsucrave.netdna-cdn.com image 570x463]

No, that's not missing a letter.

/Moose knuckle


Cameltoe.....o.O I disagree with cameltoe...I think of...camels. And deserts. And warmth. OMG. I'm ready for summer.

I need to stop posting during overnight shifts.
 
2013-02-02 07:01:23 AM

Mentat: Canada needs to ban high-capacity knives.


Won't somebody think of the children?
s8.postimage.org
 
2013-02-02 07:05:56 AM

Gyrfalcon: Now if any of those victims had been armed with a gun, the stabber would be dead now. And clearly that would be better. For some reason.


Let's be realistic here. If someone runs at me with a knife, I have no problem putting several 165 grain JHP .40 slugs in their chest. I'm pretty sure that the last time that someone did that, I didn't feel bad for cracking them in the face with an oxygen tank.
 
2013-02-02 07:10:30 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?


Not every stabbing is meant to kill the target.  If someone stabs you even once, you're pretty much at their mercy after that, because you're not fighting back very well, and you're not outrunning them.
 
2013-02-02 07:13:05 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?

Not every stabbing is meant to kill the target.  If someone stabs you even once, you're pretty much at their mercy after that, because you're not fighting back very well, and you're not outrunning them.


I actually agree with you on this. If you're not able to drop someone before they get in range of the knife, nothing you do is going to turn out well. You're going to get hurt, badly, even if you walk away from it. Real life is not a Chuck Norris movie, and knife fighting is a dirty, bloody mess of a thing.

In close combat, given a choice between a guy with a pistol, and the guy running at me with a knife, I'd kill the knife guy first.
 
2013-02-02 07:13:13 AM
he had a hammer too... so bang on that for a while
 
2013-02-02 07:18:43 AM
I don't understand the whole gun debate.  Honestly.

If I wanted to kill a lot of people....the most people possible.  I wouldn't use a gun.  I wouldn't use a knife.  I'd use explosives and fire.  And you can't regulate either of those things.  A can of gasoline, some chains, some locks, and you can kill everyone in the room.  The worst school killing in the US didn't involve guns.

Explosives are much harder to track, easier to get and can be set off in a variety of different ways.

Hell, if I were really desperate - I'd use a car.  Get a big pickup truck or something similar and just drive through a crowded pedestrian area.

I don't own a gun, I don't hang out at the gun range....I don't have stock in a gun company.  I don't care about guns.  But if I were insane, if I wanted to kill people, I can't fathom how gun regulation would stop me or any other psychopath who wants to kill people.
 
2013-02-02 07:25:55 AM

Fark_Guy_Rob: If I wanted to kill a lot of people....the most people possible.  I wouldn't use a gun.  I wouldn't use a knife.  I'd use explosives and fire.  And you can't regulate either of those things.  A can of gasoline, some chains, some locks, and you can kill everyone in the room.  The worst school killing in the US didn't involve guns.

Explosives are much harder to track, easier to get and can be set off in a variety of different ways.


You're actually more likely to kill yourself doing that, and gasoline is crappy for creating a bomb - big flash, little spread. If you're using a petrochemical, propane would be the way to go. At minimum, you'd want to use black powder in a closed metallic or plastic container, if not a home-mixed high grade explosive. Locks and chains are an inefficient spread type of projectile. Most handbooks for improvised munitions and anarchist cookbooks recommend either nails or ball bearings (bomb vests that suicide bombers use are loaded with them.)

It's not hard to actually make an ANFO bomb, and you can buy the fertilizer over time - which is what McVeigh did to avoid detection. You can make a blasting cap out of a 12 gauge shotgun shell with very little knowledge.

/wow. Why are there black helicopters outside?
//The skinheads like to use pipebombs, and leave special suprises for cops and emergency responders. Know your enemy, so to speak.
 
2013-02-02 07:27:31 AM
Yeah, it's way better to be crippled for the rest of your life than go out quickly and in painless shock.
 
2013-02-02 07:31:38 AM
Good point subs.  No gun deaths in that article.
 
2013-02-02 07:32:59 AM

edmo: Good point subs.  No gun deaths in that article.


I'm pretty sure you can own a Firearm in Canada, it's just highly regulated depending on what province you're in.
 
2013-02-02 07:33:00 AM

Fark_Guy_Rob: I don't understand the whole gun debate.  Honestly.

If I wanted to kill a lot of people....the most people possible.  I wouldn't use a gun.  I wouldn't use a knife.  I'd use explosives and fire.  And you can't regulate either of those things.  A can of gasoline, some chains, some locks, and you can kill everyone in the room.  The worst school killing in the US didn't involve guns.

Explosives are much harder to track, easier to get and can be set off in a variety of different ways.

Hell, if I were really desperate - I'd use a car.  Get a big pickup truck or something similar and just drive through a crowded pedestrian area.

I don't own a gun, I don't hang out at the gun range....I don't have stock in a gun company.  I don't care about guns.  But if I were insane, if I wanted to kill people, I can't fathom how gun regulation would stop me or any other psychopath who wants to kill people.


This.

Also, any limitation or regulation on firearms only serve to hamper/harass/limit law abiding citizens(aside from possible safety regulations, so they don't blow up in your face and such).  The lawless and crazy don't give 2 farks, apparently, about law and order. If they're bent on killing people, they WILL get it done.
 
2013-02-02 07:33:18 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?


Traitor.
 
2013-02-02 07:33:32 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?


Came here for this.
 
2013-02-02 07:37:26 AM
How can this be a real gun thread with no pics of ammo and weapons? I thought no one could tell a JHP unless there was an accompanying picture of what a box of such rounds looks like.
 
2013-02-02 07:37:53 AM

BronyMedic: Locks and chains are an inefficient spread type of projectile.


As they were mentioned, I figured they were to lock the doors, not be used as a weapon themselves...
 
2013-02-02 07:38:53 AM

omeganuepsilon: This.

Also, any limitation or regulation on firearms only serve to hamper/harass/limit law abiding citizens(aside from possible safety regulations, so they don't blow up in your face and such).  The lawless and crazy don't give 2 farks, apparently, about law and order. If they're bent on killing people, they WILL get it done.


So any limitations on the ability for the mentally ill to obtain legal firearms, which in many states can be done in a matter of five minutes, are useless because they'll buy them off the street? Laws are useless because people will break them anyway, that's your argument here?

And don't give me the crap about "they're prohibited from it". They're only prohibited if they've had a court-ordered involuntary commitment. Even if they checked themselves in for treatment of their Paranoid Schizophrenia where they think Obama is lurking in their bushes and sleep with a gun at night because of it, their only barrier to purchase is a single question on the NCIC Form.

While Lawful gun owners are not the problem, mentally ill people legally obtaining firearms IS a problem. I'm pretty OK with a restriction on that which doesn't depend on individual honesty.
 
2013-02-02 07:39:46 AM

omeganuepsilon: As they were mentioned, I figured they were to lock the doors, not be used as a weapon themselves...


I figured he'd meant them as projectiles.

A pipebomb with saran-wrapped nails around it can do horrific things to the human body.
 
2013-02-02 07:40:48 AM

BronyMedic: omeganuepsilon: This.

Also, any limitation or regulation on firearms only serve to hamper/harass/limit law abiding citizens(aside from possible safety regulations, so they don't blow up in your face and such).  The lawless and crazy don't give 2 farks, apparently, about law and order. If they're bent on killing people, they WILL get it done.

So any limitations on the ability for the mentally ill to obtain legal firearms, which in many states can be done in a matter of five minutes, are useless because they'll buy them off the street? Laws are useless because people will break them anyway, that's your argument here?

And don't give me the crap about "they're prohibited from it". They're only prohibited if they've had a court-ordered involuntary commitment. Even if they checked themselves in for treatment of their Paranoid Schizophrenia where they think Obama is lurking in their bushes and sleep with a gun at night because of it, their only barrier to purchase is a single question on the NCIC Form.

While Lawful gun owners are not the problem, mentally ill people legally obtaining firearms IS a problem. I'm pretty OK with a restriction on that which doesn't depend on individual honesty.


Where did I say we couldn't regulate mentally ill people?
I like how you fabricate the argument that you WANT to argue against, instead of reading and comprehending a post, and then replying in kind.
 
2013-02-02 07:41:14 AM

doglover: Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?

You've never seen the aftermath of a knife attack, have you.

There's a reason the "coup de grace" was invented.


I imagine it looks better than a survived gunshot wound.
 
2013-02-02 07:41:34 AM

omeganuepsilon: Where did I say we couldn't regulate mentally ill people?
I like how you fabricate the argument that you WANT to argue against, instead of reading and comprehending a post, and then replying in kind.


If that's not what you're stating here, then I apologize in advance. It seems to be a common argument on FARK.
 
2013-02-02 07:44:41 AM
Laws are needed...as an abstract thought.  It is why we already have laws..  Piling on MORE laws, does nothing to address the problem.

That is the point.

Conflating that sentiment to the desire to be free of all law is also common on fark.
 
2013-02-02 07:45:20 AM

BronyMedic: omeganuepsilon: This.

Also, any limitation or regulation on firearms only serve to hamper/harass/limit law abiding citizens(aside from possible safety regulations, so they don't blow up in your face and such).  The lawless and crazy don't give 2 farks, apparently, about law and order. If they're bent on killing people, they WILL get it done.

So any limitations on the ability for the mentally ill to obtain legal firearms, which in many states can be done in a matter of five minutes, are useless because they'll buy them off the street? Laws are useless because people will break them anyway, that's your argument here?


We can still get coke, heroine, pot, and an assortment of pills, even though legal streams of distribution are cut off.  Why would guns be any different?  In terms of smuggling ease, guns aren't detected by dogs, in terms of manufacturing ease, for the price of just a few tools and metal stock, you can make your own.. anything.
 
2013-02-02 07:49:31 AM

Fark_Guy_Rob: If I wanted to kill a lot of people....the most people possible. I wouldn't use a gun. I wouldn't use a knife. I'd use explosives and fire. And you can't regulate either of those things. A can of gasoline, some chains, some locks, and you can kill everyone in the room. The worst school killing in the US didn't involve guns.


The Newtown shooter was confronted by two people as he entered the school. He shot them both. But I'm sure if he were instead carrying a can of gasoline, he would have managed to pour gas all over them, pull out his lighter and incinerate them without catching fire himself.
 
2013-02-02 07:50:42 AM
To amend that and state what I actually would rather see than more gun control...

I would prefer the focus to be on background checks, to include screening for mental health problems.

Make people get licensed to carry, much as it is now.  Just like a car, you have to show that you know how to use one, and are not psychotic, blind, dangerously retarded, etc.(Ideally anyhow, but our execution of such things when it comes to cars isn't all that great either, psychotic AND blind AND dangerously retarded people can pretty much get in a car and drive it into a farmers market)

Ideally, one has to qualify as possessing the capabilities of responsibility and safe use.  Quantifying that can be difficult, so we're stuck with what we have.
 
2013-02-02 07:53:18 AM

omeganuepsilon: Also, any limitation or regulation on firearms only serve to hamper/harass/limit law abiding citizens(aside from possible safety regulations, so they don't blow up in your face and such). The lawless and crazy don't give 2 farks, apparently, about law and order. If they're bent on killing people, they WILL get it done.


omeganuepsilon: Piling on MORE laws, does nothing to address the problem.


So, anyone for mentioning that the last two big mass-shootings in the U.S. involved weapons legally obtained?

Don't get me wrong here, I don't know for sure that "piling on more laws" will help either- particularly when you make it sound like a Saturday night Twister game gone wrong- but it's still kinda silly to suggest that laws meant to effect the legal acquisition of such weaponry would have no effect on these incidences.

Clearly, it would.  I don't know that it would solve for it, but it would have an effect.
 
2013-02-02 07:53:30 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: guns aren't detected by dogs


IIRC they can be trained to detect "them", ammo if not things like gun-oil.
 
2013-02-02 07:54:42 AM
Weekly shootings or rare knife fight. Think i'll take my chances in Canada.
 
2013-02-02 07:56:15 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: We can still get coke, heroine, pot, and an assortment of pills, even though legal streams of distribution are cut off.  Why would guns be any different?  In terms of smuggling ease, guns aren't detected by dogs,


It's a false comparison. Guns are not addictive substances - Adrenaline Junkies don't count - they don't alter mentation, or provide a sense of chemically induced euphoria. There isn't a black market for them in the United States.

There aren't multinational actors who make billions on the illegal trade of them in the United States.

At any rate, I'm not talking about BANNING firearms. I'm very much pro-gun ownership in general. I'm talking about making it harder for the mentally ill to get them legally.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: in terms of manufacturing ease, for the price of just a few tools and metal stock, you can make your own.. anything.


Let me stop you right there.

Very few people have the capability, knowledge, or skills in the United States - let alone the capital, to fashion an Automatic or Semi-Automatic weapon from scrap metal. It takes thousands of dollars alone of equipment to even bore a barrel from bar stock.

Even if guns were made illegal, this has NEVER been a problem in countries in the First World that do so.
 
2013-02-02 07:56:28 AM

doglover: You've never seen the aftermath of a knife attack, have you.

There's a reason the "coup de grace" was invented.


You're right, there is literally no way that modern medicine can possibly take care of lacerations!  You know what?  I wish that attacker had carried a gun and just killed the victims quickly, rather than forcing them through the horrible pain of getting stitches, applying neosporin and bandages, and from the torture of having visible scars on their skin.
 
2013-02-02 07:58:19 AM

evil saltine: Fark_Guy_Rob: If I wanted to kill a lot of people....the most people possible. I wouldn't use a gun. I wouldn't use a knife. I'd use explosives and fire. And you can't regulate either of those things. A can of gasoline, some chains, some locks, and you can kill everyone in the room. The worst school killing in the US didn't involve guns.

The Newtown shooter was confronted by two people as he entered the school. He shot them both. But I'm sure if he were instead carrying a can of gasoline, he would have managed to pour gas all over them, pull out his lighter and incinerate them without catching fire himself.


Method of deployment would change, but the impact could be just as great as far as body count and grievous wounds, and it wouldn't take a genius either.

Your ridiculous equivocation's inverse is just as absurd.  Pour bullets on people and throw an ignited zippo at them.
Come back when you get out of junior high, sparky.
 
2013-02-02 07:59:18 AM

omeganuepsilon: To amend that and state what I actually would rather see than more gun control...

I would prefer the focus to be on background checks, to include screening for mental health problems.


I would love to know exactly what that means- as my understanding of both recent cases I spoke of above don't suggest that either Lanza or Holmes would have thrown any "red flags" in this area.

omeganuepsilon: psychotic AND blind AND dangerously retarded


Said this before in other threads, it remains as true here: as much as you can't fix it, you also can't legislate or regulate stupidity.  Not unless you're willing to accept a barrage of assaults on freedoms in this country that are FAR more invasive, pervasive, and far-reaching than even the most stringent of proposed gun control statutes on the block right now.

Unless your definition of "dangerously retarded" meant something else.
 
2013-02-02 08:00:23 AM

BronyMedic: Very few people have the capability, knowledge, or skills in the United States - let alone the capital, to fashion an Automatic or Semi-Automatic weapon from scrap metal. It takes thousands of dollars alone of equipment to even bore a barrel from bar stock.


Citation needed.
 
2013-02-02 08:01:52 AM

HMS_Blinkin: doglover: You've never seen the aftermath of a knife attack, have you.

There's a reason the "coup de grace" was invented.

You're right, there is literally no way that modern medicine can possibly take care of lacerations!  You know what?  I wish that attacker had carried a gun and just killed the victims quickly, rather than forcing them through the horrible pain of getting stitches, applying neosporin and bandages, and from the torture of having visible scars on their skin.


Another reduction to absurdity.

Speaking of things that are popular on Fark..
 
2013-02-02 08:07:29 AM

omeganuepsilon: Method of deployment would change, but the impact could be just as great as far as body count and grievous wounds, and it wouldn't take a genius either.


So why'd he choose to use a gun? Since gasoline is so much easier to get.
 
2013-02-02 08:08:16 AM

Fark_Guy_Rob: I don't understand the whole gun debate.  Honestly.

If I wanted to kill a lot of people....the most people possible.  I wouldn't use a gun.  I wouldn't use a knife.  I'd use explosives and fire.  And you can't regulate either of those things.  A can of gasoline, some chains, some locks, and you can kill everyone in the room.  The worst school killing in the US didn't involve guns.

Explosives are much harder to track, easier to get and can be set off in a variety of different ways.

Hell, if I were really desperate - I'd use a car.  Get a big pickup truck or something similar and just drive through a crowded pedestrian area.

I don't own a gun, I don't hang out at the gun range....I don't have stock in a gun company.  I don't care about guns.  But if I were insane, if I wanted to kill people, I can't fathom how gun regulation would stop me or any other psychopath who wants to kill people.


You have a point, but there must be a reason why crazy people prefer guns to explosives.  Here are two reasons I can think of off the top of my head:

1. Crazy mass murderers aren't logical.  They aren't thinking "how can I kill the greatest number of people at the lowest possible risk to myself?"  That's the way rational people might look at it, but rational people don't go plotting these kinds of killings either (outside of military operations).  These people want to personally kill their victims and watch them die, and they want to be caught and killed by police or they want to kill themselves.  Leaving a bomb anonymously doesn't accomplish either of those goals.

2. Bombs aren't that easy to make.  You can acquire the materials easily enough, but the expertise required to build a high-yield bomb that blows up only when intended is pretty high.  Most crazy murderer types don't have that kind of skill.  The asshole in Newtown, for example, was an unemployed jackass with no real skills of any kind---he didn't have the know-how to build a good bomb. Think about the number of steps involved in the process of building a really good bomb---it'd be lengthy.  The steps for killing with a semi-auto gun are: (1) point, (2) pull trigger (3) repeat.  That's it.

So I think that guns give these crazy people the ease and personal touch they want, in a way that bombs just can't.  You say "if I were insane," but then describe a rational thought process.  That's the problem.  These people are FARKING INSANE, and we have to check our desire to find a rational motive at the door when we consider their mindset.
 
2013-02-02 08:09:20 AM

BronyMedic: BraveNewCheneyWorld: We can still get coke, heroine, pot, and an assortment of pills, even though legal streams of distribution are cut off.  Why would guns be any different?  In terms of smuggling ease, guns aren't detected by dogs,

It's a false comparison. Guns are not addictive substances - Adrenaline Junkies don't count - they don't alter mentation, or provide a sense of chemically induced euphoria. There isn't a black market for them in the United States.


They're not carrying out mass shootings because of an adrenaline rush, it's to send society a message.  There's other tools they can use to get that message out, many of them are worse than guns.

BronyMedic: Very few people have the capability, knowledge, or skills in the United States - let alone the capital, to fashion an Automatic or Semi-Automatic weapon from scrap metal. It takes thousands of dollars alone of equipment to even bore a barrel from bar stock.

Even if guns were made illegal, this has NEVER been a problem in countries in the First World that do so.


No, it's not very hard.  It's hard to make one of the same quality of a factory, but to carry out shootings like we've seen in recent mass shootings, a homemade gun will suffice.  But let's even assume you're right, they can still make bombs, they can still set crowded buildings on fire and block the exits.  All of these laws we're making aren't stopping anyone but sane people, and sane people aren't the ones doing these things in the first place.  Most of these killers don't do it on a whim, OKC was planned, Columbine was planned, VT was planned as well as others, so to assume they won't make some some horrible devices to carry it out in the year leading up to the kill spree isn't likely to be accurate.
 
2013-02-02 08:12:15 AM

lewismarktwo: Yeah, it's way better to be crippled for the rest of your life than go out quickly and in painless shock.


I've concluded three things from your post:

you believe it is impossible to be crippled from a gun shot.
you believe all bullet wounds anywhere on the body is an instant painless death.
you believe it is impossible to live a happy and fulfilling life as a "crippled".
 
2013-02-02 08:14:09 AM
www.cbc.ca

Why does this look so familiar ... ?

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-02-02 08:14:27 AM

omeganuepsilon: Another reduction to absurdity.


What was absurd?  He implied that a knife wound is somehow worse than a bullet wound.  When he brought up the "coup-de-grace" he implied that victims of knife wounds need to be killed mercifully, since the wounds are un-treatable, and he chose to totally ignore the fact that the term comes from the late 1600s, and that medical technology has improved somewhat since then.
 
2013-02-02 08:14:28 AM

evil saltine: omeganuepsilon: Method of deployment would change, but the impact could be just as great as far as body count and grievous wounds, and it wouldn't take a genius either.

So why'd he choose to use a gun? Since gasoline is so much easier to get.


I'd imagine that the killers want to be more active in their event.  Pushing a button to set off a bomb doesn't give them the same level of immersion aiming at and shooting every individual.  Kind of like when people murder someone they hate, they tend to mutilate a person's face, instead of just shoot them in the heart an walk away.  Murders are emotionally charged events, they're not only looking at the end result of death.
 
2013-02-02 08:24:07 AM

Saners: lewismarktwo: Yeah, it's way better to be crippled for the rest of your life than go out quickly and in painless shock.

I've concluded three things from your post:

you believe it is impossible to be crippled from a gun shot.
you believe all bullet wounds anywhere on the body is an instant painless death.
you believe it is impossible to live a happy and fulfilling life as a "crippled".


What? You mean guns aren't instant death machines?  I've heard they are.   I'd rather not be crippled, but you can volunteer to be crippled if you want.
 
2013-02-02 08:25:07 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Murders are emotionally charged events, they're not only looking at the end result of death.


Not all are.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Kind of like when people murder someone they hate, they tend to mutilate a person's face, instead of just shoot them in the heart an walk away.


This tends to be the result of familiarity.  When you have a corpse with 80+ incidences of blunt-force trauma, you typically start looking for your suspect among close relatives and friends- someone who knew the victim well.  It takes time to build the kind of hate that boils over that way.  And because of that, these tend to be rarer in occurrence.

On the other hand, when you have a "functional murder"- one in which the killer was efficient and swift, you tend to get the "shot in the heart and walked away" scenario.  This also tends to be the more common murder scenario.  Someone wanted someone dead, that's it.

I've heard from psychologists that the typical profile for a mass shooter isn't really either of the above.  The mission of "sending a message" usually translates in their minds to "causing the most damage\trauma\shock" and doing so quickly.

Schools are picked based on those preferences.  Killing children, killing a lot of them, and doing it quickly pretty much ticks off all those goals.  Schools are like a one-stop shop for this.
 
2013-02-02 08:28:31 AM
www.mcq.org

Knives. Bah. I'm armed with one of these. Try and break into my house, and I'll fork you....wait. That doesn't sound quite right.
 
2013-02-02 08:40:55 AM
Frankly, stabbing all those people sounds exhausting and time consuming. If only there was a way to injure them in a semi-automatic fashion...

/If I got stabbed by the douche in that photo, I think I'd be too embarrassed to tell anyone. Did somebody deny him bottle service at the Ultra Lounge?
 
2013-02-02 08:43:04 AM

Smashed Hat: Frankly, stabbing all those people sounds exhausting and time consuming. If only there was a way to injure them in a semi-automatic fashion...

/If I got stabbed by the douche in that photo, I think I'd be too embarrassed to tell anyone. Did somebody deny him bottle service at the Ultra Lounge?



Got you covered friend. Just add an air pig, or a small compressor and you're ready.

www.oysterknife.co.nz
 
2013-02-02 08:52:49 AM
I just hate all these cop outs like 'Well, criminals can still get guns if they are illegal.' or 'If I was crazy and wanted to kill someone not having a gun wouldn't stop me.' like they prove something!? Can we just do some ACTUAL research, get some ACTUAL experts (not only complete anti-gunners who had a kid die vs NRA leaders), and do something logical for once?

But all those little one liners really aren't doing it for me. When they set the speed limit they don't say 'Well, criminals will still speed even though there is a punishment.' or 'If I was crazy and wanted to drive my car really fast, running out of gas wouldn't stop me.'  The point isn't that those are the same, the point is that this is a topic we could do research on and we don't have to base all of our decisions on our feelings.

/and then the part that makes me even madder is the red herring: 'Our government is trying to disarm us and take over! It was all a set up! This is a conspiracy!'
 
2013-02-02 08:53:44 AM
we need to ban knives, Canada, fruit drinks
 
2013-02-02 08:59:13 AM
Canada is not gun-free, and is FAR from an utopia, I assure you.
 
2013-02-02 09:00:19 AM

SkunkWerks: Unless your definition of "dangerously retarded" meant something else.


does it mean trees and rivers, rocks n stuff?

lolz just kidding it means "Christians"

we need to ban christians, problem solved

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-02-02 09:00:35 AM
Obsession with "collecting" guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.
 
2013-02-02 09:01:07 AM

I drunk what: SkunkWerks: Unless your definition of "dangerously retarded" meant something else.

does it mean trees and rivers, rocks n stuff?

lolz just kidding it means "Christians"

we need to ban christians, problem solved

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 181x279]


What an odd patriot you are, sacrificing the first for the second.
 
2013-02-02 09:06:35 AM

BronyMedic: What an odd patriot you are, sacrificing the first for the second.


fark em both

it's the only rational  logical choice
 
2013-02-02 09:07:21 AM
Gun-free? Which head-up-his-own-ass yank posted this?
 
2013-02-02 09:08:04 AM

I drunk what: does it mean trees and rivers, rocks n stuff?


It means "I've become a parody of myself".  Possibly "roots and twigs".
 
2013-02-02 09:11:29 AM

bingethinker: Subby is a moron. There are plenty of guns in Canada. We just have fewer nutcases who feel it's their God-given right to kill a bunch of people for no apparent reason.


There always these comparison with the states and other first world countries that citizens are allowed guns and the US is on the short end of the stick. The thing I find interesting is that they forget to mention that all of these countries other than the US has socialized healthcare...

Basically yes guns are force multipliers but they aren't the reason people are doing what they do. The issue is a very complex problem and banning guns won't fix it. shiat happens. Pray to god you aren't nearby.

duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.

FTFY any obsession falls into that category.
 
2013-02-02 09:14:32 AM

duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" owning guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.


and who owns the most guns? that's right

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com

these "adults" actually believe in angels ;D

this is what we refer to (in the clinical medical field) as "completely retarded" and yet here we are actually debating on whether or not they should be allowed to own guns?!?

is this the stone ages?

This world needs some progress.

For Evolution!
 
2013-02-02 09:16:38 AM

I drunk what: duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" owning guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.

and who owns the most guns? that's right

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 181x279]

these "adults" actually believe in angels ;D

this is what we refer to (in the clinical medical field) as "completely retarded" and yet here we are actually debating on whether or not they should be allowed to own guns?!?

is this the stone ages?

This world needs some progress.

For Evolution!


www.patentspostgrant.com
 
2013-02-02 09:29:32 AM

SkunkWerks: It means "I've become a parody of myself".


why are you parody yourself?

if you are referring to my fark login, some people have been confusing me with this "IDW" idiot, who used to post here a looooong time ago, but i can assure you he isn't here, he abandoned this place, so i thought i would use his account to repair the damage he left behind

think of me as the anti-IDW

you may have heard him warning people to not read ANY posts coming from this account, but i think that he was just afraid of Progress and Evolution, that would come from me undoing all of his BS

just like a typical christian, so retarded, afraid of things he cannot understand

but you don't have to worry about that anymore, now I am a rational and logical FREE THINKER

i've joined the Intelligence Brigade:

www.thesmokingtire.com
 
2013-02-02 09:36:23 AM

I drunk what: why are you parody yourself?


I dunno, why do you keep hitting yourself?

I drunk what: if you are referring to my fark login


Nope.

I drunk what: some people have been confusing me


I can see that.
 
2013-02-02 09:39:52 AM
Canada's not a gun-free utopia.

Canada has almost as many guns per capita as the United States.

It just doesn't have crazy people.
 
2013-02-02 09:44:14 AM

Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?


.
Done in one.
 
2013-02-02 09:47:44 AM

Ishkur: Canada's not a gun-free utopia.

Canada has almost as many guns per capita as the United States.

It just doesn't have crazy people.


I'm pretty sure your third point could be disproven rather quickly. It's just that Canada doesn't have the same retarded mentality as the US when it comes to guns.
 
2013-02-02 09:48:17 AM
Not only do Canadians have guns, some Americans even go to Canada to hunt--so the restrictions must not be that bad.
 
2013-02-02 09:50:11 AM

change1211: I'm pretty sure your third point could be disproven rather quickly. It's just that Canada doesn't have the same retarded mentality as the US when it comes to guns.


Allow me to reform my assertion

Canada has <i>treatment</I> for its crazy people.
 
2013-02-02 09:50:58 AM

Gyrfalcon: Now if any of those victims had been armed with a gun, the stabber would be dead now. And clearly that would be better. For some reason.


Well if the first stabbing victim shot him, that would have saved the other people a stabbing, so there would be that benefit.
 
2013-02-02 09:51:23 AM
The NKA has released a statement urging Canadians to carry concealed cutlery. The only thing that ill stop a bad guy with a knife is a good guy with a knife.
 
2013-02-02 09:53:46 AM

rattchett: Well if the first stabbing victim shot him, that would have saved the other people a stabbing, so there would be that benefit.



As well as killed half a dozen innocent people 1/4 of a mile away because he needed an AR-15 to defend himself like any true American should.
 
2013-02-02 09:53:58 AM
Whatever happened to those awesome knife stores in the mall? They seemed to have disappeared. I blame OJ.
 
2013-02-02 10:13:29 AM
Maybe this thinking is up next?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm
 
2013-02-02 10:16:24 AM

BronyMedic: edmo: Good point subs.  No gun deaths in that article.

I'm pretty sure you can own a Firearm in Canada, it's just highly regulated depending on what province you're in.


Province is irrelevant. The level of regulation is dependant on the the type of firearms. Handguns are highly regulated.
 
2013-02-02 10:18:02 AM
I know more than one cop that has told me personally that knifes scare the crap out of them more than guns because they are silent.  A bouncer I knew got stabbed 5 times and the bouncer next to him didn't have a clue what was going on.  Remember, inside ~20 feet, a knife wins.
http://www.marsec4.com/2010/02/realistic-edged-weapon-defense-traini ng /
 
2013-02-02 10:19:07 AM

crab66: rattchett: Well if the first stabbing victim shot him, that would have saved the other people a stabbing, so there would be that benefit.


As well as killed half a dozen innocent people 1/4 of a mile away because he needed an AR-15 to defend himself like any true American should.


When did that happen? Sounds terrible. And pulled forth from your unremarkable anus.
 
2013-02-02 10:21:22 AM

pciszek: Not only do Canadians have guns, some Americans even go to Canada to hunt--so the restrictions must not be that bad.


Quantum Apostrophe: Canada is not gun-free, and is FAR from an utopia, I assure you.


Ironic statements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony#Verbal_irony">verbal irony)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony#cite_note-2">[2] are statements that imply a meaning in opposition to their literal meaning. A situation is often considered to be ironic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony#Situational_irony">situational irony) if there is an "incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony#cite_note-3">
 
2013-02-02 10:26:11 AM

doglover: Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?

You've never seen the aftermath of a knife attack, have you.

There's a reason the "coup de grace" was invented.


Yeah, bullet wounds are so much prettier.

What the hell is wrong with you???
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-02-02 10:40:58 AM

I drunk what: duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" owning guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.

and who owns the most guns? that's right

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 181x279]

these "adults" actually believe in angels ;D

this is what we refer to (in the clinical medical field) as "completely retarded" and yet here we are actually debating on whether or not they should be allowed to own guns?!?

is this the stone ages?

This world needs some progress.

For Evolution!


I hope you are jesting. If not go sit in a corner while us grownups have a discussion.
I am Christian. I don't suffer from any of the delusions of which you speak.
Stop generalizing and lumping all Christians of any variance together. It is offensive and smacks of ignorance.
 
2013-02-02 10:41:13 AM

Fail in Human Form: crab66: Oh hey look. Everyone survived someone being a crazy asshole.


If only they all had guns this would have never happened.


And by that I mean several people would certainly be dead.

Preferably the attacker.  If the first victim would have sprayed the walls with the attacker's brains it would have saved a few victims and the cost of a trial.


You see, this is why liberals tend to think people like you can't handle the responsibility that comes with the right to bear arms.

It's the "god, I hope someone tries to break in here tonight so I can try out my new toy!" mentality.

No one died in this situation, and this is the best possible outcome, and yet, here you are saying that this would have turned out better if the "right" people had died.

You know, there's a name for people who take pleasure in the deaths of others, even bad people:  you're called sociopaths.  And no, you shouldn't be allowed to own ANY weapons whatsoever.
 
2013-02-02 10:45:27 AM

eggrolls: doglover: Spiralmonkey: Yep, 6 people are injured, not dead.  What's your point, subby?

You've never seen the aftermath of a knife attack, have you.

There's a reason the "coup de grace" was invented.

Yeah, bullet wounds are so much prettier.

What the hell is wrong with you???


It depends on the bullet.  It could be like being stabbed with an ice-pick  which is better than being stabbed by a kitchen knife.
 
2013-02-02 10:46:53 AM
There needs to be a middle-ground solution that the extremists on both sides will loathe but will actually be supported by most non-zealots.

I see no reason why one shouldn't have to pass a severe, buttprobing background and mental health check before being allowed to legally purchase guns.  You know, so we can be reasonably sure that you're really the "law-abiding" citizen you say you are.  Then once you have clearance, you're issued a permit and can buy any damn guns you want.  Unless you screw up somewhere, then your permit, and guns, are taken away.

Anyone caught providing guns to somebody without a permit gets sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
 
2013-02-02 11:03:19 AM
Clearly we have to arm Canadians against people who live in France.
 
2013-02-02 11:18:10 AM
Canada should ban the French.

Seriously, it seems like that would solve a lot of your nation's problems.

/just don't send them here
 
2013-02-02 11:26:13 AM

Spaghettiows: There needs to be a middle-ground solution that the extremists on both sides will loathe but will actually be supported by most non-zealots.

I see no reason why one shouldn't have to pass a severe, buttprobing background and mental health check before being allowed to legally purchase guns.  You know, so we can be reasonably sure that you're really the "law-abiding" citizen you say you are.  Then once you have clearance, you're issued a permit and can buy any damn guns you want.  Unless you screw up somewhere, then your permit, and guns, are taken away.

Anyone caught providing guns to somebody without a permit gets sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.


So... I get more time for providing a gun than raping a woman.

Brilliant.
 
2013-02-02 11:26:18 AM

change1211: Ishkur: Canada's not a gun-free utopia.

Canada has almost as many guns per capita as the United States.

It just doesn't have crazy people.

I'm pretty sure your third point could be disproven rather quickly. It's just that Canada doesn't have the same retarded mentality as the US when it comes to guns.


I would say it is more of our socialized (gasp) safety net that makes sure people with mental and medical issues don't get to the point that this happens. But also our gun laws are more restrictive (and it could be said that our culture isn't as gun happy (well we didn't have to fight for our independence so that plays a good part of it)) but don't take our maple syrup or there could be words.
 
2013-02-02 11:41:30 AM

rikkards: change1211: Ishkur: Canada's not a gun-free utopia.

Canada has almost as many guns per capita as the United States.

It just doesn't have crazy people.

I'm pretty sure your third point could be disproven rather quickly. It's just that Canada doesn't have the same retarded mentality as the US when it comes to guns.

I would say it is more of our socialized (gasp) safety net that makes sure people with mental and medical issues don't get to the point that this happens. But also our gun laws are more restrictive (and it could be said that our culture isn't as gun happy (well we didn't have to fight for our independence so that plays a good part of it)) but don't take our maple syrup or there could be words.


You probably are right on the socialized medicine/social safety net side of things.

Most of the people I know have at least one rifle or shotgun and there are many more pistols than people think. Also, most people could get a firearm within 24 hours if they really wanted one. Yet shootings are pretty rare.

Maybe American individualism leads to isolated people. Maybe a lack of healthcare leads to problems festering. Is the problem cultural?
 
2013-02-02 11:42:09 AM

bingethinker: Subby is a moron. There are plenty of guns in Canada. We just have fewer nutcases who feel it's their God-given right to kill a bunch of people for no apparent reason.


More of the criminals & religious fundamentalists wound up here rather than in Canada. Perhaps a synergy between criminality & extreme religious beliefs may explain some of our problems down here.

/ Georgia was once a British penal colony, IIRC.
 
2013-02-02 11:52:46 AM

rikkards: change1211: Ishkur: Canada's not a gun-free utopia.

Canada has almost as many guns per capita as the United States.

It just doesn't have crazy people.

I'm pretty sure your third point could be disproven rather quickly. It's just that Canada doesn't have the same retarded mentality as the US when it comes to guns.

I would say it is more of our socialized (gasp) safety net that makes sure people with mental and medical issues don't get to the point that this happens. But also our gun laws are more restrictive (and it could be said that our culture isn't as gun happy (well we didn't have to fight for our independence so that plays a good part of it)) but don't take our maple syrup or there could be words.


I don't think it's necessarily the socialist infrastructure that worries conservative-minded Americans. I think it's the stupid crap that also gets passed in more socialist countries.

When I went to Ontario last summer... I couldn't get a hamburger cooked anything under medium-well. It destroys the taste. It's a presupposition that I'm too stupid as a person to realize the "health risk" that comes with eating undercooked meat. I mean, I'm from the American Midwest. Burgers are basically my go-to dish at a restaurant. I've eaten them my entire life, never ordering them medium well. I've never once gotten sick from it.

The impounding of cars for speeding is another thing. I realize it's an Ontario thing and not necessarily true across the whole of Canada, but it's sort of an overreaction to speeding. It's amusing when you see a driver with Ontario plates here in central Missouri (it happens every once in a while), because they are almost always going well over the 70 MPH speed limit. If Canada didn't have these sorts of regulations and just had the socialized medicine... I don't think Americans would have as much objection to it.

/We're free here, eh, floor it!
 
2013-02-02 12:09:17 PM
i read that as "drug-free utopia"
i guess guns == drugs in my mind
 
2013-02-02 12:18:48 PM

Oysterman: Pocket Ninja: If the people he attacked had been carrying knives themselves, this wouldn't have been a problem.

National Sharp Object Association says that the only way to be sure is to let them also wield swords.


Wait til the government investigates the Royal Society For Putting Thing On Top Of Other Things...

i628.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-02 12:24:02 PM

jaybeezey: V-neck t and half a fauxhawk. Clearly he couldn't deal with his douche bag anymore.


He looks like the kind of typical doosh that Vancouver attracts. He'd probably sell his grandma for a house in West Van....
 
2013-02-02 12:26:33 PM
Marine1:
Anyone caught providing guns to somebody without a permit gets sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

So... I get more time for providing a gun than raping a woman.

Brilliant.


Oh, you mean like our current drug laws, where a pot dealer gets more time than a lifetime child molester.

But seriously, thank you because it was a brilliant idea.  So it will never happen.
 
2013-02-02 12:31:53 PM
I am from Canada, Alberta specifically. We have plenty of guns here, probably as many per capita as the United States; however, our culture is different.  We respect that guns can be dangerous, so we have checks and balances on the acquisition of them.  We have background checks, mental health checks, and a wait period.  We also have laws regarding the storage of guns, they have to be locked up.  I am not saying that everyone follows these laws, but overall, we do. And consequently, we have a lot less gun violence than in the States.

My personal opinion is that Americans need to change the way they think about guns.  Many gun owners seem to have this wild west bloodlust fantasy about shooting intruders, rapists, etc. They seem to live in fear that their personal safety is on the line, which I think is rather ridiculous, as all kinds of crime is down to record low numbers.  But the NRA and media foster this perception, for their own gain, obviously, and so gun owners think emotionally rather than logically.

I'm glad I live in Canada.
 
2013-02-02 12:37:50 PM

change1211: Ishkur: Canada's not a gun-free utopia.

Canada has almost as many guns per capita as the United States.

It just doesn't have crazy people.

I'm pretty sure your third point could be disproven rather quickly. It's just that Canada doesn't have the same retarded mentality as the US when it comes to guns.


The reason for this is our political discussions are not charged with the same violent rhetoric that is common in the United States.

We are a nation that gained its independence through peaceful negotiation. It wasn't a case of 1/3 of the population using force of arms to impose its ideal of a perfect government upon the rest of the population. Our folk heroes tend not to men of violence (hockey players excepted). Our politicians tend to be bland academics, smart yet boring people. We do not view them as rock stars but merely as civil servants.

The United States gained its independence through violent force. It was more of a civil war than an actual revolution. Approximately 1/3 of the colonists were in favour of independence, 1/3 wished to remain loyal to England and work out their differences through proper political channels, and 1/3 didn't give a crap either way they just wanted to be left alone to live their lives in peace. After the revolution ended there was a very violent, unstable period in the colonies where the fledgling nation was purged, through violent force of those who were deemed impure. In some cases the conflict divided families with one son going to fight for the Loyalists and the other going to fight with the Revolutionists. The purity of that family was determined by which son made it out of the war alive. If the Revolutionist son made it back alive then the family was deemed Patriots and left in peace. If the Loyalist son made it back alive then they were branded traitors and were likely to be tortured or murdered and their property confiscated. Most of them fled to Canada.

Even for the Revolutionists there was an uneasy period after the war where they tried to work out whether they would become 12 independent nations or one nation with 12 states. Tensions were such that it could have almost sparked a war between the states. Eventually they worked things out and as the victors were free to write history as they felt fit which is why most American school children probably learn that the American Revolution was about taxation without representation (it wasn't, Franklin was specifically instructed not to accept representation in the British Parliament) and that it was a revolution that had the complete support of the colonial population and everything was peachy keen and sunshine when the war was over.

The over all message behind the revolution is "if you don't like the way things are, get a gun and kill everybody who doesn't think the same way you do". This is how the 2nd Amendment is interpreted. The Founding Fathers, in their infallible wisdom, did not draft the 2nd Amendment to ensure for the common defence of their fledgling nation through a well regulated militia of citizen soldiers, they wrote the 2nd Amendment to give every American citizen the right to grab a gun and kill everybody who doesn't think the same way they do if they don't like the way things are. This is what people are talking about when they talk about 2nd Amendment Solutions. It is the underlying cultural foundation of the United States that Guns equal POWER and their history has proved this. This is why people like Ted Nugent fantasize about leading his army of Wolverines to march on D.C. to install him as the future George Washington of HIS new ideal of what the United States should be.

Now some people will be quick to blame violent video games or violent movies as the reason why the United States has so much gun violence compared to nations like Canada. However, we Canadians love our violent video games just as much as our American cousins. We enjoy a good gory shoot 'em up as much as they do south of the border. We consume the exact same cultural artefacts as our American counterparts and we also love our guns too. But we don't have anywhere near the level of gun violence and mass shooting are almost unheard of. The reason is because we don't have the cultural belief that guns equal power. We buy guns for reasons such as targeting shooting is fun, or my personal favourite reason to own a gun ducks are really delicious. We don't buy them so we can live out the fantasy of overthrowing out democratically elected government and killing everyone who stands in our way of putting in the type of government we'd rather have instead.

The 2nd Amendment solution crowd aren't a threat to the government of the United States, they haven't been since the invention of the bomber. No matter how much they draw a line in the sand and say "if the government crosses that line then I'm going to raise my army and start killing people" they will always move that line back another inch when nobody is looking. An actual armed revolt is bloody, horrible, messy, and those people who fantasize about being the next George Washington are probably going to be cut down in the first 20 minutes of a real fire fight. They've got a full belly, a nice TV, and 100 channels on box to keep them happy and they can always go on YouTube to vent a little steam now and then.

Unfortunately, every now and then an over stressed, delusional person with his 2nd Amendment Solution stockpile will snap under the weight of his own impotence to affect any real change in the world around him. This is where the culture of guns equal power turns deadly. This is when they decide to show the world what power they really have. Their power will be felt forever in the tears of grieving loved ones. Their power will be felt by ever child who is afraid to go to school. Their power will be felt in ever co-worker who fears returning to the job. The 24 hour news channels will gorge themselves on their glorious power. So they take their gun and they execute their 2nd Amendment right to grab a gun and kill everyone who does things they don't want being done.

This is why mass shootings happen. As a nation the United States has created a culture that glorifies the concept of a brave individual standing up against what they perceive to be tyranny and unleashing hell fire upon them until everyone they view as a tyrant lays dead on the ground or their gun is taken from their cold dead hand.

Guns and violence are the religion of the United States.
 
2013-02-02 12:44:28 PM

Spaghettiows: Marine1:
Anyone caught providing guns to somebody without a permit gets sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

So... I get more time for providing a gun than raping a woman.

Brilliant.

Oh, you mean like our current drug laws, where a pot dealer gets more time than a lifetime child molester.

But seriously, thank you because it was a brilliant idea.  So it will never happen.


...

Eh, next person.
 
2013-02-02 12:57:26 PM
Marine1:

Eh, next person.

Compelling argument!  Good Boy, you get the gold star!  Now go to bed, sonny.
 
2013-02-02 12:57:50 PM
Marine1:
The impounding of cars for speeding is another thing. I realize it's an Ontario thing and not necessarily true across the whole of Canada, but it's sort of an overreaction to speeding. It's amusing when you see a driver with Ontario plates here in central Missouri (it happens every once in a while), because they are almost always going well over the 70 MPH speed limit. If Canada didn't have these sorts of regulations and just had the socialized medicine... I don't think Americans would have as much objection to it.

You have to be REALLY booting it past the speed limit in Ontario to get your car confiscated. Generally the accepted social contract is if you're driving 10 above the posted speed limit or 20 above the posted speed limit on a 400 series highway the cops will look the other way. 15/25 you're taking a chance and you're likely to get a ticket if the cop is behind on his quota. 20/30 don't come biatching to me when you get busted.

The real fun is every now and then you get an American tourist up here who doesn't realize we use the metric system.
 
2013-02-02 01:06:15 PM

Fail in Human Form: crab66: Oh hey look. Everyone survived someone being a crazy asshole.


If only they all had guns this would have never happened.


And by that I mean several people would certainly be dead.

Preferably the attacker.  If the first victim would have sprayed the walls with the attacker's brains it would have saved a few victims and the cost of a trial.

The solution, clearly, is to only give guns to people who can prove conclusively they will never misuse it. And that's nobody. Thanks for backing up gun control!
 
2013-02-02 01:13:00 PM
Meanwhile in Canada, we measure our mass shooting counter in YEARS and not WEEKS.
 
2013-02-02 01:27:09 PM

rattchett: BronyMedic: edmo: Good point subs.  No gun deaths in that article.

I'm pretty sure you can own a Firearm in Canada, it's just highly regulated depending on what province you're in.

Province is irrelevant. The level of regulation is dependant on the the type of firearms. Handguns are highly regulated.



Actually pronvincial regulations do play some part in it.  The purchase of a handgun or other restricted firearm is indeed regulated at the federal level, however the transport of said weapon, typically falls to the provinces and their Chief Firearms Officer.  In order to tranport my pistol anywhere off my property I need an Authorization To Transport.  The standards for a ATT DO vary from province to province.  In Saskatchewan (and I think Alberta is the same), once I have received my ATT I'm authorized to move my pistol from my house, to any registered firing range, gunsmith, or dealer/buyer, in the province, at any time.  In other province I had heard that the restrictions are much tougher, as in every time you go to the range you need to request an ATT that states where you are going, when, and when you will be returning.  To me that's way too much regulation and hassle. (Note, during my transport my pistol has to be rendered inoperable, unloaded, locked ina secure case, and in the trunk.

Marine1:

The impounding of cars for speeding is another thing. I realize it's an Ontario thing and not necessarily true across the whole of Canada, but it's sort of an overreaction to speeding. It's amusing when you see a driver with Ontario plates here in central Missouri (it happens every once in a while), because they are almost always going well over the 70 MPH speed limit. If Canada didn't have these sorts of regulations and just had the socialized medicine... I don't think Americans would have as much objection to it.

I think that this just for cars who are exceededing the speed limit by an excessive amount, ie. more than 40kph (25mph).  It's basically an excuse to clammp down on street racers, don't know if it gets abused for other things.  I too wish we could have juicier burgers...I feel your pain.


Ghastly:

Now some people will be quick to blame violent video games or violent movies as the reason why the United States has so much gun violence compared to nations like Canada. However, we Canadians love our violent video games just as much as our American cousins. We enjoy a good gory shoot 'em up as much as they do south of the border. We consume the exact same cultural artefacts as our American counterparts and we also love our guns too. But we don't have anywhere near the level of gun violence and mass shooting are almost unheard of. The reason is because we don't have the cultural belief that guns equal power. We buy guns for reasons such as targeting shooting is fun, or my personal favourite reason to own a gun ducks are really delicious. We don't buy them so we can live out the fantasy of overthrowing out democratically elected government and killing everyone who stands in our way of putting in the type of government we'd rather have instead.

And Yet the Czech Republic has much more liberal gun laws than Canada, still stricter than the states, and their rate of gun deaths is almost half of Canada's.  Frankly I wish our gun laws more closer to Czech Republics than what we have here currently.  Unfortunately the only party that is likely to loosen them is the Conservative, who I otherwise hate.

Anyways...

bottom line, I'd rather be shot than stabbed.
 
2013-02-02 01:37:29 PM

ReluctantPaladin: bottom line, I'd rather be shot than stabbed.


Pretty sweet to live in a country where having either one of those things happen is statistically insignificant.
 
2013-02-02 02:16:11 PM
Dig up some statistics showing how Canada is a more violent place than the US, please.
 
2013-02-02 02:22:15 PM

SandmanEatsYourBrain: Meanwhile in Canada, we measure our mass shooting counter in YEARS and not WEEKS.


We also act as a buffer between you and Mexico, we're still paying the consequences of slavery, and we have a much larger population.
 
2013-02-02 02:52:38 PM

Ghastly: change1211: Ishkur: Canada's not a gun-free utopia.

Canada has almost as many guns per capita as the United States.

It just doesn't have crazy people.

I'm pretty sure your third point could be disproven rather quickly. It's just that Canada doesn't have the same retarded mentality as the US when it comes to guns.

The reason for this is our political discussions are not charged with the same violent rhetoric that is common in the United States.

We are a nation that gained its independence through peaceful negotiation. It wasn't a case of 1/3 of the population using force of arms to impose its ideal of a perfect government upon the rest of the population. Our folk heroes tend not to men of violence (hockey players excepted). Our politicians tend to be bland academics, smart yet boring people. We do not view them as rock stars but merely as civil servants.

The United States gained its independence through violent force. It was more of a civil war than an actual revolution. Approximately 1/3 of the colonists were in favour of independence, 1/3 wished to remain loyal to England and work out their differences through proper political channels, and 1/3 didn't give a crap either way they just wanted to be left alone to live their lives in peace. After the revolution ended there was a very violent, unstable period in the colonies where the fledgling nation was purged, through violent force of those who were deemed impure. In some cases the conflict divided families with one son going to fight for the Loyalists and the other going to fight with the Revolutionists. The purity of that family was determined by which son made it out of the war alive. If the Revolutionist son made it back alive then the family was deemed Patriots and left in peace. If the Loyalist son made it back alive then they were branded traitors and were likely to be tortured or murdered and their property confiscated. Most of them fled to Canada.

Even for the Revolutionists there was an uneasy period after the war where they tried to work out whether they would become 12 independent nations or one nation with 12 states. Tensions were such that it could have almost sparked a war between the states. Eventually they worked things out and as the victors were free to write history as they felt fit which is why most American school children probably learn that the American Revolution was about taxation without representation (it wasn't, Franklin was specifically instructed not to accept representation in the British Parliament) and that it was a revolution that had the complete support of the colonial population and everything was peachy keen and sunshine when the war was over.

The over all message behind the revolution is "if you don't like the way things are, get a gun and kill everybody who doesn't think the same way you do". This is how the 2nd Amendment is interpreted. The Founding Fathers, in their infallible wisdom, did not draft the 2nd Amendment to ensure for the common defence of their fledgling nation through a well regulated militia of citizen soldiers, they wrote the 2nd Amendment to give every American citizen the right to grab a gun and kill everybody who doesn't think the same way they do if they don't like the way things are. This is what people are talking about when they talk about 2nd Amendment Solutions. It is the underlying cultural foundation of the United States that Guns equal POWER and their history has proved this. This is why people like Ted Nugent fantasize about leading his army of Wolverines to march on D.C. to install him as the future George Washington of HIS new ideal of what the United States should be.

Now some people will be quick to blame violent video games or violent movies as the reason why the United States has so much gun violence compared to nations like Canada. However, we Canadians love our violent video games just as much as our American cousins. We enjoy a good gory shoot 'em up as much as they do south of the border. We consume the exact same cultural artefacts as our American counterparts and we also love our guns too. But we don't have anywhere near the level of gun violence and mass shooting are almost unheard of. The reason is because we don't have the cultural belief that guns equal power. We buy guns for reasons such as targeting shooting is fun, or my personal favourite reason to own a gun ducks are really delicious. We don't buy them so we can live out the fantasy of overthrowing out democratically elected government and killing everyone who stands in our way of putting in the type of government we'd rather have instead.

The 2nd Amendment solution crowd aren't a threat to the government of the United States, they haven't been since the invention of the bomber. No matter how much they draw a line in the sand and say "if the government crosses that line then I'm going to raise my army and start killing people" they will always move that line back another inch when nobody is looking. An actual armed revolt is bloody, horrible, messy, and those people who fantasize about being the next George Washington are probably going to be cut down in the first 20 minutes of a real fire fight. They've got a full belly, a nice TV, and 100 channels on box to keep them happy and they can always go on YouTube to vent a little steam now and then.

Unfortunately, every now and then an over stressed, delusional person with his 2nd Amendment Solution stockpile will snap under the weight of his own impotence to affect any real change in the world around him. This is where the culture of guns equal power turns deadly. This is when they decide to show the world what power they really have. Their power will be felt forever in the tears of grieving loved ones. Their power will be felt by ever child who is afraid to go to school. Their power will be felt in ever co-worker who fears returning to the job. The 24 hour news channels will gorge themselves on their glorious power. So they take their gun and they execute their 2nd Amendment right to grab a gun and kill everyone who does things they don't want being done.

This is why mass shootings happen. As a nation the United States has created a culture that glorifies the concept of a brave individual standing up against what they perceive to be tyranny and unleashing hell fire upon them until everyone they view as a tyrant lays dead on the ground or their gun is taken from their cold dead hand.

Guns and violence are the religion of the United States.


I know I'm not your type but I'd wife you right now. I have never found the words to express what you said. The closest I've come is that Americans always seem so afraid. It's a culture of fear. You are far more eloquent.
 
2013-02-02 03:22:52 PM

BronyMedic: Gyrfalcon: Now if any of those victims had been armed with a gun, the stabber would be dead now. And clearly that would be better. For some reason.

Let's be realistic here. If someone runs at me with a knife, I have no problem putting several 165 grain JHP .40 slugs in their chest. I'm pretty sure that the last time that someone did that, I didn't feel bad for cracking them in the face with an oxygen tank.


It might have been kinder to have just shot them at that point.

I dropped one of those on my toe once.
Ow.
 
2013-02-02 03:56:40 PM

gja: I drunk what: duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" owning guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.

and who owns the most guns? that's right

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 181x279]

these "adults" actually believe in angels ;D

this is what we refer to (in the clinical medical field) as "completely retarded" and yet here we are actually debating on whether or not they should be allowed to own guns?!?

is this the stone ages?

This world needs some progress.

For Evolution!

I hope you are jesting. If not go sit in a corner while us grownups have a discussion.
I am Christian. I don't suffer from any of the delusions of which you speak.
Stop generalizing and lumping all Christians of any variance together. It is offensive and smacks of ignorance.


do you believe angels are real?
 
2013-02-02 04:45:54 PM
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-02-02 05:27:42 PM

ReluctantPaladin: Actually pronvincial regulations do play some part in it. The purchase of a handgun or other restricted firearm is indeed regulated at the federal level, however the transport of said weapon, typically falls to the provinces and their Chief Firearms Officer. In order to tranport my pistol anywhere off my property I need an Authorization To Transport. The standards for a ATT DO vary from province to province.


In Quebec you need to take a course in that law and pass a test before you can get a permit.

http://www.fqtir.qc.ca/en/bill9training.php
 
2013-02-02 07:49:41 PM

Fail in Human Form: Gyrfalcon: Now if any of those victims had been armed with a gun, the stabber would be dead now. And clearly that would be better. For some reason.

[i.imgur.com image 500x224]


How is it that you're not sure, when he concluded with, "For some reason."? That is a common rhetorical device. It indicates 1) that he doesn't think that is a preferable result, and 2) that he is perplexed by the opinion of those who would think it is.

/It's an odd thing to explain... but now you know how that phrase is used.
 
2013-02-02 10:38:04 PM
doglover:There's a reason the "coup de grace" was invented.

So you'd have a way of killing Trolls in D&D if you didn't have fire or acid?

Seriously, get a high crit weapon like a scythe or a greataxe and full power attack, they're not getting up.
 
2013-02-02 11:01:20 PM

ReluctantPaladin: rattchett: BronyMedic: edmo: Good point subs.  No gun deaths in that article.

I'm pretty sure you can own a Firearm in Canada, it's just highly regulated depending on what province you're in.

Province is irrelevant. The level of regulation is dependant on the the type of firearms. Handguns are highly regulated.


Actually pronvincial regulations do play some part in it.  The purchase of a handgun or other restricted firearm is indeed regulated at the federal level, however the transport of said weapon, typically falls to the provinces and their Chief Firearms Officer.  In order to tranport my pistol anywhere off my property I need an Authorization To Transport.  The standards for a ATT DO vary from province to province.  In Saskatchewan (and I think Alberta is the same), once I have received my ATT I'm authorized to move my pistol from my house, to any registered firing range, gunsmith, or dealer/buyer, in the province, at any time.  In other province I had heard that the restrictions are much tougher, as in every time you go to the range you need to request an ATT that states where you are going, when, and when you will be returning.  To me that's way too much regulation and hassle. (Note, during my transport my pistol has to be rendered inoperable, unloaded, locked ina secure case, and in the trunk.

Marine1:

The impounding of cars for speeding is another thing. I realize it's an Ontario thing and not necessarily true across the whole of Canada, but it's sort of an overreaction to speeding. It's amusing when you see a driver with Ontario plates here in central Missouri (it happens every once in a while), because they are almost always going well over the 70 MPH speed limit. If Canada didn't have these sorts of regulations and just had the socialized medicine... I don't think Americans would have as much objection to it.

I think that this just for cars who are exceededing the speed limit by an excessive amount, ie. more than 40kph (25mph).  It's basically an excuse to clammp down on street racers, don't know if it gets abused for other things.  I too wish we could have juicier burgers...I feel your pain.


Ghastly:

Now some people will be quick to blame violent video games or violent movies as the reason why the United States has so much gun violence compared to nations like Canada. However, we Canadians love our violent video games just as much as our American cousins. We enjoy a good gory shoot 'em up as much as they do south of the border. We consume the exact same cultural artefacts as our American counterparts and we also love our guns too. But we don't have anywhere near the level of gun violence and mass shooting are almost unheard of. The reason is because we don't have the cultural belief that guns equal power. We buy guns for reasons such as targeting shooting is fun, or my personal favourite reason to own a gun ducks are really delicious. We don't buy them so we can live out the fantasy of overthrowing out democratically elected government and killing everyone who stands in our way of putting in the type of government we'd rather have instead.

And Yet the Czech Republic has much more liberal gun laws than Canada, still stricter than the states, and their rate of gun deaths is almost half of Canada's.  Frankly I wish our gun laws more closer to Czech Republics than what we have here currently.  Unfortunately the only party that is likely to loosen them is the Conservative, who I otherwise hate.

Anyways...

bottom line, I'd rather be shot than stabbed.


My ATT for transport of my pistols is good for all ranges in my province. I live in eastern Canada.
 
2013-02-02 11:40:34 PM

omeganuepsilon: BronyMedic: Very few people have the capability, knowledge, or skills in the United States - let alone the capital, to fashion an Automatic or Semi-Automatic weapon from scrap metal. It takes thousands of dollars alone of equipment to even bore a barrel from bar stock.

Citation needed.


Tell that to Wallace Gusler.

/Couldn't resist/
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-02-03 12:21:50 PM

I drunk what: gja: I drunk what: duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" owning guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.

and who owns the most guns? that's right

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 181x279]

these "adults" actually believe in angels ;D

this is what we refer to (in the clinical medical field) as "completely retarded" and yet here we are actually debating on whether or not they should be allowed to own guns?!?

is this the stone ages?

This world needs some progress.

For Evolution!

I hope you are jesting. If not go sit in a corner while us grownups have a discussion.
I am Christian. I don't suffer from any of the delusions of which you speak.
Stop generalizing and lumping all Christians of any variance together. It is offensive and smacks of ignorance.

do you believe angels are real?


Don't be ridiculous.
 
2013-02-03 05:28:31 PM

gja: I drunk what: gja: I drunk what: duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" owning guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.

and who owns the most guns? that's right

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 181x279]

these "adults" actually believe in angels ;D

this is what we refer to (in the clinical medical field) as "completely retarded" and yet here we are actually debating on whether or not they should be allowed to own guns?!?

is this the stone ages?

This world needs some progress.

For Evolution!

I hope you are jesting. If not go sit in a corner while us grownups have a discussion.
I am Christian. I don't suffer from any of the delusions of which you speak.
Stop generalizing and lumping all Christians of any variance together. It is offensive and smacks of ignorance.

do you believe angels are real?

Don't be ridiculous.


How about The Devil? Sorta a package dealeo.
Real?
 
2013-02-03 05:54:20 PM

gja: do you believe angels are real?

Don't be ridiculous.


oh good you don't believe the Bible, you're our favorite kind of christian, i'm ok you're ok

just between you and me, Jesus was myth (wink wink nudge nudge)

but don't worry your little secret will be safe with me
 
2013-02-03 05:56:42 PM

snocone: How about The Devil? Sorta a package dealeo.
Real?


is santa claus real? as for which god you should believe in:

s3-ec.buzzfed.com

LOLZ lulz lulz lulz
 
2013-02-04 08:14:26 AM

Ghastly: Guns and violence are the religion of the United States.


I thought it was Atheism and Science?

meh, i'm ok you're ok

we should ban guns and religion
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-02-04 08:45:24 AM

snocone: gja: I drunk what: gja: I drunk what: duckpoopy: Obsession with "collecting" owning guns is a mental illness. Track these people and lock them up.

and who owns the most guns? that's right

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 181x279]

these "adults" actually believe in angels ;D

this is what we refer to (in the clinical medical field) as "completely retarded" and yet here we are actually debating on whether or not they should be allowed to own guns?!?

is this the stone ages?

This world needs some progress.

For Evolution!

I hope you are jesting. If not go sit in a corner while us grownups have a discussion.
I am Christian. I don't suffer from any of the delusions of which you speak.
Stop generalizing and lumping all Christians of any variance together. It is offensive and smacks of ignorance.

do you believe angels are real?

Don't be ridiculous.

How about The Devil? Sorta a package dealeo.
Real?


Ohhhhhhhhh. I see now. You are one of those "all or nothing" types who are predisposed to extremism yourself.

Good to know. I won't expect much reasonable debate from you then.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-02-04 09:04:32 AM

I drunk what: gja: do you believe angels are real?

Don't be ridiculous.

oh good you don't believe the Bible, you're our favorite kind of christian, i'm ok you're ok

just between you and me, Jesus was myth (wink wink nudge nudge)

but don't worry your little secret will be safe with me


Oh yeah, the Bible.
Well, there's where it all falls down, right? See, the problem is when people put too much BLIND belief in books which are inherently filled with opinion and things that have someone's point-of-view injected into them.
The devil? Really? You think we need an actual physical manifestation of evil when we as humans are doing a more than adequate job keeping evil alive?

And angels? Well, I think we sometimes, as a race, manage to get that square covered as well. Though not nearly as often as we need to. I catch some fellow humans doing the nicest things at times. Angels you say? Yes, there are some ad they often look like people we pass without a moments thought.

Now...onto the whole 'Jesus' thing (as-it-were). I am sure there was a man with that name. It is entirely feasible and it fits the period. I will posit he may have done great good as well. I am willing to accept he was no myth, but not willing to accept everything attributed to him. Then I ruminate on the 'holy trinity' thing and that's where they lose me because I get hung up on the fact my brain screams at me for trying to just take that on faith.

And, to nobody specifically, but rather all who read this:
I will ask that nobody try to categorize me and my Christianity. I do not fit into your neatly predefined patterns.
I also will extend you the same respect and courtesy. However, if behaving like petulant children is your preferred behavioral mode I can accommodate your predilection for needing some written verbal discourse.
 
2013-02-04 11:57:51 AM

gja: I will ask that nobody try to categorize me and my Christianity.


i'm ok you're ok

gja: Well, there's where it all falls down, right? See, the problem is when people put too much BLIND belief in books which are inherently filled with opinion and things that have someone's point-of-view injected into them.


yep and all those verses about angels, i just ignore, cuz they don't make any sense anyway. easy peasy

gja: The devil? Really? You think we need an actual physical manifestation of evil when we as humans are doing a more than adequate job keeping evil alive?


yep and all those verses about the Devil (and demons), i just ignore, cuz they don't make any sense anyway. easy peasy

gja: And angels?


we already covered that one, anything that we skip over isn't real anyway so why bicker about it?

gja: Now...onto the whole 'Jesus' thing (as-it-were).


yep all those verses about Jesus, i just ignore, cuz they don't make any sense anyway. easy peasy

gja: I am sure there was a man with that name. It is entirely feasible and it fits the period. I will posit he may have done great good as well.


who cares? i'm sure there was a man named Jesus who cuts my grass, and it's possible that he may have done nice things as well

gja: I am willing to accept he was no myth


and the logical rational world is willing to accept that he is

gja: but not willing to accept everything attributed to him.


especially all that stuff about magic and being god, etc.. i just ignore the parts that mention him, even indirectly

only retards would believe that stuff
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-02-04 01:54:33 PM

I drunk what: gja: I will ask that nobody try to categorize me and my Christianity.
i'm ok you're ok

gja: Well, there's where it all falls down, right? See, the problem is when people put too much BLIND belief in books which are inherently filled with opinion and things that have someone's point-of-view injected into them.
yep and all those verses about angels, i just ignore, cuz they don't make any sense anyway. easy peasy

gja: The devil? Really? You think we need an actual physical manifestation of evil when we as humans are doing a more than adequate job keeping evil alive?
yep and all those verses about the Devil (and demons), i just ignore, cuz they don't make any sense anyway. easy peasy

gja: And angels?
we already covered that one, anything that we skip over isn't real anyway so why bicker about it?

gja: Now...onto the whole 'Jesus' thing (as-it-were).
yep all those verses about Jesus, i just ignore, cuz they don't make any sense anyway. easy peasy

gja: I am sure there was a man with that name. It is entirely feasible and it fits the period. I will posit he may have done great good as well.
who cares? i'm sure there was a man named Jesus who cuts my grass, and it's possible that he may have done nice things as well

gja: I am willing to accept he was no myth
and the logical rational world is willing to accept that he is

gja: but not willing to accept everything attributed to him.
especially all that stuff about magic and being god, etc.. i just ignore the parts that mention him, even indirectly
only retards would believe that stuff


Not sure if you're trolling or what. I will note your leaning on the use of "retarded" far too often for me to believe you are "(in the clinical medical field)".
I dislike the "i'm OK you're OK" glibness, but maybe that is just me being so NY-ish and having that come through.

In any case, don't expect to be taken seriously when you suggest banning guns and religion. The former you may garner some support for, the latter and you can expect people to turn their backs to you and never again listen to what you are saying.
 
2013-02-04 02:51:21 PM

gja: the latter and you can expect people to turn their backs to you and never again listen to what you are saying


they've already lost, nobody cares

To Progress!

gja: I dislike the "i'm OK you're OK" glibness


well then perhaps you don't understand how the concept works, allow me to elaborate

i'm ok you're ok

gja: The former you may garner some support for


thedroidyourelookingfor.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-04 03:43:37 PM

gja: Not sure if you're trolling or what


You aren't sure if Idw is trolling?

Here's a hint. If he's posting, he's trolling.
 
2013-02-04 03:56:04 PM

Egoy3k: gja: Not sure if you're trolling or what

You aren't sure if Idw is trolling?

Here's a hint. If he's posting, he's trolling.


so then you don't believe in evolution? you are what is wrong with this country

learn how to read then get a science book
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-02-04 03:59:25 PM

Egoy3k: gja: Not sure if you're trolling or what

You aren't sure if Idw is trolling?

Here's a hint. If he's posting, he's trolling.


Yeah, well now he is on the illustrious IGNORE list.
But, thanks for confirming what I suspected.
 
2013-02-04 04:39:27 PM

gja: Egoy3k: gja: Not sure if you're trolling or what

You aren't sure if Idw is trolling?

Here's a hint. If he's posting, he's trolling.

Yeah, well now he is on the illustrious IGNORE list.
But, thanks for confirming what I suspected.


tell your friends, and anyone that sounds like me
 
Displayed 164 of 164 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report