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.

(Atlanta Journal Constitution)   NRA's Wayne LaPierre gets skewered. FARK: On Fox News   (blogs.ajc.com) divider line 194
    More: Interesting, justifiable homicide, Fox News  
•       •       •

13208 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Feb 2013 at 2:51 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-03 03:31:06 PM
There are lots of people in the US who live in bumblefark little towns where everyone knows everyone else and sees no problems with everyone owning 300 firearms for "hunting" and keeping an eye on that black family that just moved in.  In NRA terms, their heartland.  These people will NEVER agree with even the most basic restraints on firearms, because they live in fear 24/7.  Fear of the government taking away their trailers, fear of brown people, fear of change, fear fear fear.

That is the sad truth.  They will rather that children go to school wearing ballistic armor than give up that fear.
 
2013-02-03 03:33:14 PM
When you end up claiming that private citizens should be allowed to own nuclear weapons in order to preserve the integrity of your argument, there's a good chance what you have is a shiatty argument that isn't worth preserving.
 
2013-02-03 03:34:45 PM

Daemonik: There are lots of people in the US who live in bumblefark little towns where everyone knows everyone else and sees no problems with everyone owning 300 firearms for "hunting" and keeping an eye on that black family that just moved in.  In NRA terms, their heartland.  These people will NEVER agree with even the most basic restraints on firearms, because they live in fear 24/7.  Fear of the government taking away their trailers, fear of brown people, fear of change, fear fear fear.

That is the sad truth.  They will rather that children go to school wearing ballistic armor than give up that fear.


Know what is funny about this? You are the most ignorant backwoods retard I  have ever met, and I live in one of these areas you stereotype and hate openly.

We don't live in fear because we know each other, we tend to like each other, and if we dont, we tend to avoid one another. Ever wonder why every shooting happens in one of your GLORIOUS and enlightened bastions of education and liberal utopias known as big cities? Because you are generally just as slackjawed, stupid, and hateful as you stereotype the rural individuals to be, except you have the distinct illusion that your shiat don't stink because you pack like rats into run down apartments and swear its the good life. Ever wonder why racial hate crimes take place in medium to large cities and less, far far less, in rural areas? Because we get to know the "black folk" we live with and tend to get along well with them. Perhaps if you spent less time stereotyping people and more time getting to know them, you wouldn't come across as so god damn wrong and so stupid.
 
2013-02-03 03:35:11 PM

Mrtraveler01: I think he's trolling.

He has to be. It would sadden me to think that there are people that stupid out there.


Um, noooo.  Not trolling, not even a little.

How exactly is it "stupid" to accept that the President of the United States, a man who receives upwards of 500 death threats a month, a job with a 10% rate of assassination, might be just a little more deserving of a higher level of security than the average joe, who gets, on average zero death threats in a lifetime.

/You guys are so out of touch you really have no grasp the way the rest of America sees your positions.  I guess you won't even realize you've lost until the laws start getting passed.
 
2013-02-03 03:35:22 PM

msupf: RickN99: msupf: ajgeek: That hardly seemed like a skewering. LaPierre is correct; if you're rich, you generally have security in public and limiting public access to high capacity magazines (easily replicated with minimal tooling) while everyone in power has them is hypocritical. Wallace was also correct; gangs aren't committing mass murders on school children (they're killing each other and police, generally). They ARE, however, able and probably willing to supply these psychotics with the weapons if they've got the money.

/And the debate rages on

So is it not hypocritical for lapierre to criticize Obama for having security follow his high-profile target children when he himself (and his family) goes pretty much everywhere with a private armed security detail?

Why would it be?  Is LaPierre telling people that that armed security doesn't work and is not the answer?  It seems that LaPierre is doing for himself what he believes should be allowed for others.  Obama is doing for himself what he believes should be denied for others.

Lapierre's repeated stance is that Obama is an elitist because he has armed security. Nothing obama has done would restrict others from hiring a properly trained security detail. Lapierre himself has armed security... So is he or is he not part of that elitist culture? Or are certain people maybe justified in having a higher level of visible and persistent security in public because of what they do for a living?


Is the training free?
 
2013-02-03 03:35:22 PM

Mrtraveler01: 800-588-2300


So you're saying Obama wants to begin an "Empire"....
 
2013-02-03 03:35:28 PM

Craps the Gorilla: ajgeek: That hardly seemed like a skewering. LaPierre is correct; if you're rich, you generally have security in public and limiting public access to high capacity magazines (easily replicated with minimal tooling) while everyone in power has them is hypocritical. Wallace was also correct; gangs aren't committing mass murders on school children (they're killing each other and police, generally). They ARE, however, able and probably willing to supply these psychotics with the weapons if they've got the money.

/And the debate rages on

im still curious why they keep using the mass shootings as the fuel for gun control when thousands more die as single murder victims. and i got a hunch its by handguns, not AR15's and shiat.


The FBI would agree with you.  My personal belief is that people who want gun control are trying to get a group of weapons that most people would agree deserve strict scrutiny.  I'm with you--we should be focusing more on handguns and the ease with which people can get them--but I also understand where some people are trying to get a winnable fight before going after things that may be more controversial.
 
2013-02-03 03:35:39 PM

Daemonik: and keeping an eye on that black family that just moved in.


Can't they just hire George Zimmermann for that? I hear he's super effective.
 
2013-02-03 03:35:43 PM

nmrsnr: ajgeek: LaPierre is correct; if you're rich, you generally have security in public and limiting public access to high capacity magazines (easily replicated with minimal tooling) while everyone in power has them is hypocritical.

1) citation needed that standard security and not SWAT use high capacity mags.

2) how is it hypocritical to say that high profile, high risk targets are allowed to have highly trained, specially dedicated security personnel, while saying that the average untrained civilian, who is not a particular target, has a right to the same weaponry as trained security. That's the same argument as saying that since the military has RPGs, it's hypocritical that I can't have one.


I shoot USPSA and IDPA. (Look it up...), and am former military.

The civilian sector is, has been, and always will be the "go to" guys for all things shooting, with either rifle or pistol. Out of ALL our military organizations, the ONLY guys who can actually shoot worth a shiat are in either the special operations community, or in a dedicated marksmanship unit (AMU for example). These organizations hire and use CIVILIAN SHOOTERS to train their trainers, and their individual team members.

Why?

Time, money, motivation.

Armed "professions" CAN not, DO not, and in some cases, simply WILL not dedicate the time and money to train their forces to any decent standard, and even those that DO have decent training programs don't fund SUSTAINMENT training to keep the edge sharp. Instead, they rely on small "specialized" units to shoulder the load, and provide them with enough training to make them mediocre compared to their civilian counterparts.

Even if they DID have the time, and cash to fund training, the overwhelming majority of "armed professionals" are NOT "gun" people, and have NO motivation to do ANYTHING but meet the absolute MINIMUM standards of performance. To the overwhelming majority of them I have encountered, what they do is just a way to earn a paycheck, and that's it.

So you CAN'T argue that civilians don't get the kind of training that "armed professionals" do, because the civilian sector IS the primary source of GOOD training for any "armed profession" worthy of the name.

If anything, citizens should be pissed that the "armed professions" are about as skilled and "professional" as are our "professional" waste disposal crews.


Shoot some matches and see what happens when a cop, or a "soldier", or any other individual shows up thinking they are an "armed professional". They usually SUCK, and get their asses handed to them by the C and D shooters. I know a couple of master class shooters that are cops, but they became master class shooters thanks to the training and sustainment provided by our CIVILIAN shooting club and matches as opposed to their "professional" cop training.

So, no, the government doesn't have the market on firearm training, proficiency, OR safety, far from it.
It is the CIVILIAN sector that has, and always SHOULD, set the standard for the tax funded shooters out there.
 
2013-02-03 03:35:57 PM

atomicmask: And yes I am in favor of letting private citizens own everything the military has, being as the cost of such things would limit them greatly in how they could use them, and enough laws exist that make misuse of such items instant rectification for stripping them of said items.Stop being such a coward, the world is not as crazy and irresponsible as you think. YOU are not the only sane responsible person.


I'm honestly having trouble believing that you are a real person, who actually believes this. Do you honestly think terrorist organizations and hostile governments don't have the capital to purchase such things were they readily available? Do you honestly believe that they don't have simpathizers in the US who would willingly buy and use such devices? Do you honestly believe that the punishment of life imprisonment and "we won't let you play with them anymore" in any way mitigates the effect of someone launching a missile into a building, just a normal one, not even a nuke?

Call me a coward? I am not afraid of reasonable danger, but I also don't have surgery performed on me by my next door neighbor. Why? Not because I'm a coward, but because it's a recklessly and ridiculously stupid idea on its face, and I treat it as such.
 
2013-02-03 03:36:05 PM

atomicmask: Daemonik: There are lots of people in the US who live in bumblefark little towns where everyone knows everyone else and sees no problems with everyone owning 300 firearms for "hunting" and keeping an eye on that black family that just moved in.  In NRA terms, their heartland.  These people will NEVER agree with even the most basic restraints on firearms, because they live in fear 24/7.  Fear of the government taking away their trailers, fear of brown people, fear of change, fear fear fear.

That is the sad truth.  They will rather that children go to school wearing ballistic armor than give up that fear.

Know what is funny about this? You are the most ignorant backwoods retard I  have ever met, and I live in one of these areas you stereotype and hate openly.

We don't live in fear because we know each other, we tend to like each other, and if we dont, we tend to avoid one another. Ever wonder why every shooting happens in one of your GLORIOUS and enlightened bastions of education and liberal utopias known as big cities? Because you are generally just as slackjawed, stupid, and hateful as you stereotype the rural individuals to be, except you have the distinct illusion that your shiat don't stink because you pack like rats into run down apartments and swear its the good life. Ever wonder why racial hate crimes take place in medium to large cities and less, far far less, in rural areas? Because we get to know the "black folk" we live with and tend to get along well with them. Perhaps if you spent less time stereotyping people and more time getting to know them, you wouldn't come across as so god damn wrong and so stupid.


You need help.
 
2013-02-03 03:38:08 PM
That wasn't a skewering, that was a limp hand job with no clean up.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-02-03 03:38:11 PM

nmrsnr: ajgeek: LaPierre is correct; if you're rich, you generally have security in public and limiting public access to high capacity magazines (easily replicated with minimal tooling) while everyone in power has them is hypocritical.

1) citation needed that standard security and not SWAT use high capacity mags.

2) how is it hypocritical to say that high profile, high risk targets are allowed to have highly trained, specially dedicated security personnel, while saying that the average untrained civilian, who is not a particular target, has a right to the same weaponry as trained security. That's the same argument as saying that since the military has RPGs, it's hypocritical that I can't have one.


The same way it's hypocritical to say that elites like President Obama should have launch authority for nuclear weapons but the homeless dude who talks to himself shouldn't.
 
2013-02-03 03:38:13 PM

atomicmask: RandomRandom: atomicmask: this was not a skewering, this was the NRA guy being reasonable and fox going "BUT BUT BUT, WHAT ABOUT THIS"

The argument should be that what is good for the president and the rich is good for the commoner and the poor. If obama does not want people to have firearms he should relinquish his guards firearms first. He is a citizen first, president second.

Wow, you really don't get it.  LOL

THIS is why you're losing.  THIS is why the NRA is getting their clock cleaned.  You're so completely out of touch that you have absolutely no awareness just how out of touch you are.

Here's a clue.  The President of the farking United States needs armed guards because statistically, it's perhaps the single most dangerous job in the United States.  Nearly 10% of US Presidents have been killed on the job.  Many more have been the targets of assassins.

The President of the United States gets upwards of FIVE HUNDRED death threats each and every month.

How many do you get?  Your kids?

See the difference?  See why El Presidente's kids might need armed guards while the rest of us don't?

No?  You don't see the difference?  FANTASTIC (I mean this honestly).  That means the NRA is going to continue losing this battle.

WOW LOL YOU REALLY GET IT TOO..

Numb nuts I do not care how dangerous his position is, I do not care how many threats he gets. 1 or 1 million, he is a citizen first, subject to the same laws and regulations as all other citizens. You are so stupid you do not see that you are making the position of president akin to the position of king in 1600's england. One set of laws for the common, one for the lords, and none for the king. fark that, everyone is equal, scary dangerous (and extremely profitable) position as president or not.


It's so much easier to shill when you remove nuance and see everything as just black or white. When it's convenient to do so, at least.
 
2013-02-03 03:38:35 PM
I would say atomicmask isn't very good at this, but then again he's continuing to derail the thread.
 
2013-02-03 03:39:04 PM

ReverendJasen: atomicmask: The police should follow the same laws, as well as the military.

So you're saying the military should not have automatic weapons or any other form of heavy weaponry?
Are you on crack?


Actually, this I kind of agree with.  The increasing militarization of the Police throughout our country is why we have so many situations of the police killing innocent people.  Take the police's guns away and have them go back to relying on state or federal SWAT teams for situations where high firepower are necessary.  Why do we expect our local police to be prepared to single handedly fight a small war anyway?
 
2013-02-03 03:39:04 PM

nmrsnr: atomicmask: And yes I am in favor of letting private citizens own everything the military has, being as the cost of such things would limit them greatly in how they could use them, and enough laws exist that make misuse of such items instant rectification for stripping them of said items.Stop being such a coward, the world is not as crazy and irresponsible as you think. YOU are not the only sane responsible person.

I'm honestly having trouble believing that you are a real person, who actually believes this. Do you honestly think terrorist organizations and hostile governments don't have the capital to purchase such things were they readily available? Do you honestly believe that they don't have simpathizers in the US who would willingly buy and use such devices? Do you honestly believe that the punishment of life imprisonment and "we won't let you play with them anymore" in any way mitigates the effect of someone launching a missile into a building, just a normal one, not even a nuke?

Call me a coward? I am not afraid of reasonable danger, but I also don't have surgery performed on me by my next door neighbor. Why? Not because I'm a coward, but because it's a recklessly and ridiculously stupid idea on its face, and I treat it as such.


Do you honestly believe uranium, or weapons grade plutonium, is easy enough to get your hands on it does not require a billion dollar factory to even produce the stuff? Do you not think that the high cost of creating accompanied by the extremely dangerous nature of getting such would not lead to very very strict methods (Which are already in place) of legally owning and getting such materials? Let alone the costs of weapons parts to even make such a bomb? You farkers need to stop watching 24 so damn much, its not that easy.
 
2013-02-03 03:39:40 PM
It's fun watching Fox News eat their own.
It's fun watching Republicans realize that corporate profits used to fuel their campaign are higher & mightier than their campaign. Public viewpoints are changing and Fox News will not be a mouthpiece for whatever isn't selling, no matter how much they've sold it before.
 
2013-02-03 03:40:09 PM

atomicmask: Daemonik: There are lots of people in the US who live in bumblefark little towns where everyone knows everyone else and sees no problems with everyone owning 300 firearms for "hunting" and keeping an eye on that black family that just moved in.  In NRA terms, their heartland.  These people will NEVER agree with even the most basic restraints on firearms, because they live in fear 24/7.  Fear of the government taking away their trailers, fear of brown people, fear of change, fear fear fear.

That is the sad truth.  They will rather that children go to school wearing ballistic armor than give up that fear.

Know what is funny about this? You are the most ignorant backwoods retard I  have ever met, and I live in one of these areas you stereotype and hate openly.

We don't live in fear because we know each other, we tend to like each other, and if we dont, we tend to avoid one another. Ever wonder why every shooting happens in one of your GLORIOUS and enlightened bastions of education and liberal utopias known as big cities? Because you are generally just as slackjawed, stupid, and hateful as you stereotype the rural individuals to be, except you have the distinct illusion that your shiat don't stink because you pack like rats into run down apartments and swear its the good life. Ever wonder why racial hate crimes take place in medium to large cities and less, far far less, in rural areas? Because we get to know the "black folk" we live with and tend to get along well with them. Perhaps if you spent less time stereotyping people and more time getting to know them, you wouldn't come across as so god damn wrong and so stupid.


What an inferiority complex looks like.
 
2013-02-03 03:40:14 PM
FTA: "UPDATE: I've dealt with this several times in the comments below, but let me post it here as well. Yes, the circumstances of Kyle's death suggest that he was given no real chance by his killer to defend himself. But the sad truth is, that's almost always the case anyway. The good guy almost never gets the drop on the bad guy; the Keith Ratliff murder here in Georgia is another example of that reality.
In almost every case, the person who draws the weapon first has an overwhelming advantage, and most of the time the person who pulls first is the criminal. If you're getting robbed at gunpoint on the street, for example, having a concealed weapon in your shoulder holster does you no good at all, and if it tempts you to try something stupid, it could end up getting you and others killed.
Let's review the hard data, shall we? Each year, the FBI reports, some 200 justifiable homicides are committed with a firearm. That's a tiny, tiny number, given the estimated 300 million firearms in circulation. That's one justifiable homicide for each 1.5 million firearms. That's the basis on which these fantasies are built. (And for the record, I recognize and support the constitutional right to possess firearms for home defense, etc.)
On the other hand, some 10,000 people are murdered each year with a firearm."


Think about that the next time you start fantasizing about "killin' someone whut's breakin inta ya house"... the criminal will already have his gun drawn and pointed at the first sucker who comes down the stairs. I know I would, because I would assume that they are armed, even if only with a baseball bat.  He will almost always have the drop on you, which is why out of the thousands of people killed with guns each year and the millions of guns in circulation, relatively few incidents turn out like those NRA fantasies suggest.

Yet they keep pushing that string.
 
2013-02-03 03:40:26 PM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: I would say atomicmask isn't very good at this, but then again he's continuing to derail the thread.


Which just goes to show that his debate opponents aren't very good at this either.
 
2013-02-03 03:41:21 PM

ox45tallboy: Mrtraveler01: 800-588-2300

So you're saying Obama wants to begin an "Empire"....


kristinhoppe.files.wordpress.com
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-02-03 03:42:43 PM

Craps the Gorilla: ajgeek: That hardly seemed like a skewering. LaPierre is correct; if you're rich, you generally have security in public and limiting public access to high capacity magazines (easily replicated with minimal tooling) while everyone in power has them is hypocritical. Wallace was also correct; gangs aren't committing mass murders on school children (they're killing each other and police, generally). They ARE, however, able and probably willing to supply these psychotics with the weapons if they've got the money.

/And the debate rages on

im still curious why they keep using the mass shootings as the fuel for gun control when thousands more die as single murder victims. and i got a hunch its by handguns, not AR15's and shiat.


Because they don't have the money do do both even though both need to be done.
 
2013-02-03 03:45:22 PM

Daemonik: Actually, this I kind of agree with. The increasing militarization of the Police throughout our country is why we have so many situations of the police killing innocent people. Take the police's guns away and have them go back to relying on state or federal SWAT teams for situations where high firepower are necessary. Why do we expect our local police to be prepared to single handedly fight a small war anyway?


Well, I was only talking military.
I agree, normal police units do not need to be armed for combat.  They should never be involved in combat.  Problem is, they sure think that's their job now.
 
2013-02-03 03:46:26 PM
Is it me or does Chris Wallace sound like a 50s newscaster? I guess it points to the Fox News target demographic.
 
2013-02-03 03:46:39 PM
Look I do not want the government deciding who is worthy of personal defense and who is not. I think the law should apply to all people, risk or not, wealth or not, position or not.

I do not get how this is considered insane or trolling. It is farking frightening to me that you all are so backwards you honestly think that private rights and defense and equal protection under the law is trolling...
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-02-03 03:47:02 PM
StoPPeRmobile:

Peasants do not have the right to defend themselves with arms. They should be farming and nothing else. Leave the thinking to our betters. If you want to have arms, joing the army.

I think it's cute how you think trying to frame it as a class issue will make people want to have Rambo toys.
 
2013-02-03 03:47:55 PM

vpb: Craps the Gorilla: ajgeek: That hardly seemed like a skewering. LaPierre is correct; if you're rich, you generally have security in public and limiting public access to high capacity magazines (easily replicated with minimal tooling) while everyone in power has them is hypocritical. Wallace was also correct; gangs aren't committing mass murders on school children (they're killing each other and police, generally). They ARE, however, able and probably willing to supply these psychotics with the weapons if they've got the money.

/And the debate rages on

im still curious why they keep using the mass shootings as the fuel for gun control when thousands more die as single murder victims. and i got a hunch its by handguns, not AR15's and shiat.

Because they don't have the money do do both even though both need to be done.


Yea it's a hazy topic and noone always clearly right. It's a shame a tragedy must hit us in order for shiat to get done. Nothing new though
 
2013-02-03 03:47:58 PM

Matrix Flavored Wasabi: Is it me or does Chris Wallace sound like a 50s newscaster? I guess it points to the Fox News target demographic.


He tries too much to be like his dad.

Which is hard to do when you work for a partisan media outlet.
 
2013-02-03 03:48:02 PM

Hagenhatesyouall: I shoot USPSA and IDPA. (Look it up...), and am former military...


Your argument doesn't really hold up. I don't doubt anything you've said, but just because the MOST SKILLED civilians are better than the AVERAGE professional does not mean that the AVERAGE civilian should be privy to the equipment handled by the AVERAGE professional.

It's be like saying that every civilian should be allowed to show up to help fight fires, because some of the best firefighters are volunteer firefighters. Since some of the best firefighters to be found are not professionals, we should therefore allow any citizen who wants to to fight fires just by their asking.
 
2013-02-03 03:49:09 PM

vpb: StoPPeRmobile:

Peasants do not have the right to defend themselves with arms. They should be farming and nothing else. Leave the thinking to our betters. If you want to have arms, joing the army.

I think it's cute how you think trying to frame it as a class issue will make people want to have Rambo toys.


I think its cute how you think framing it as outlandish will make people think equal protection under the law of all citizens is silly, and some citizens are more worthy of defense then others.

wait thats not cute, thats farking insanity.
 
2013-02-03 03:50:26 PM

atomicmask: We don't live in fear because we know each other, we tend to like each other, and if we dont, we tend to avoid one another. Ever wonder why every shooting happens in one of your GLORIOUS and enlightened bastions of education and liberal utopias known as big cities? Because you are generally just as slackjawed, stupid, and hateful as you stereotype the rural individuals to be, except you have the distinct illusion that your shiat don't stink because you pack like rats into run down apartments and swear its the good life. Ever wonder why racial hate crimes take place in medium to large cities and less, far far less, in rural areas? Because we get to know the "black folk" we live with and tend to get along well with them. Perhaps if you spent less time stereotyping people and more time getting to know them, you wouldn't come across as so god damn wrong and so stupid.


You live in Phoenix!

Living in the 6th largest city in the US is not rural my friend.
 
2013-02-03 03:50:33 PM

nmrsnr: Hagenhatesyouall: I shoot USPSA and IDPA. (Look it up...), and am former military...

Your argument doesn't really hold up. I don't doubt anything you've said, but just because the MOST SKILLED civilians are better than the AVERAGE professional does not mean that the AVERAGE civilian should be privy to the equipment handled by the AVERAGE professional.

It's be like saying that every civilian should be allowed to show up to help fight fires, because some of the best firefighters are volunteer firefighters. Since some of the best firefighters to be found are not professionals, we should therefore allow any citizen who wants to to fight fires just by their asking.


Actually everybody should be able to fight fires, especially those who have a vested interest in things not burning down. What a twisted world you all live in to think personal responsibility and protecting yourself as well as your property is "crazy"
 
2013-02-03 03:51:08 PM

Mrtraveler01: atomicmask: We don't live in fear because we know each other, we tend to like each other, and if we dont, we tend to avoid one another. Ever wonder why every shooting happens in one of your GLORIOUS and enlightened bastions of education and liberal utopias known as big cities? Because you are generally just as slackjawed, stupid, and hateful as you stereotype the rural individuals to be, except you have the distinct illusion that your shiat don't stink because you pack like rats into run down apartments and swear its the good life. Ever wonder why racial hate crimes take place in medium to large cities and less, far far less, in rural areas? Because we get to know the "black folk" we live with and tend to get along well with them. Perhaps if you spent less time stereotyping people and more time getting to know them, you wouldn't come across as so god damn wrong and so stupid.

You live in Phoenix!

Living in the 6th largest city in the US is not rural my friend.


I moved like 4 years ago, I just have not updated my profile.
 
2013-02-03 03:52:19 PM

RandomRandom: Mrtraveler01: I think he's trolling.

He has to be. It would sadden me to think that there are people that stupid out there.

Um, noooo.  Not trolling, not even a little.

How exactly is it "stupid" to accept that the President of the United States, a man who receives upwards of 500 death threats a month, a job with a 10% rate of assassination, might be just a little more deserving of a higher level of security than the average joe, who gets, on average zero death threats in a lifetime.

/You guys are so out of touch you really have no grasp the way the rest of America sees your positions.  I guess you won't even realize you've lost until the laws start getting passed.


I would wager that the majority of non-celebrity crime victims never had a death threat against them, nor a 10% death rate in their position. And yet...they still become victims. Is it more dangerous to be the president, or to be a woman that has to walk through the ghetto or take a bus when her midnight shifts ends. Is it more dangerous to be the president, or to be an easy target for a druggie who sees valuables in your house he or she can easily steal and sell.

I don't agree with "the president needs more security argument." There are lots of situations I can think of that need equal if not more security in the US, where criminals and the mentally I'll are well armed.
 
2013-02-03 03:52:47 PM

atomicmask: I moved like 4 years ago, I just have not updated my profile.


A thorough background check may have revealed that.
 
2013-02-03 03:53:05 PM

atomicmask: Daemonik: There are lots of people in the US who live in bumblefark little towns where everyone knows everyone else and sees no problems with everyone owning 300 firearms for "hunting" and keeping an eye on that black family that just moved in.  In NRA terms, their heartland.  These people will NEVER agree with even the most basic restraints on firearms, because they live in fear 24/7.  Fear of the government taking away their trailers, fear of brown people, fear of change, fear fear fear.

That is the sad truth.  They will rather that children go to school wearing ballistic armor than give up that fear.

Know what is funny about this? You are the most ignorant backwoods retard I  have ever met, and I live in one of these areas you stereotype and hate openly.

We don't live in fear because we know each other, we tend to like each other, and if we dont, we tend to avoid one another. Ever wonder why every shooting happens in one of your GLORIOUS and enlightened bastions of education and liberal utopias known as big cities? Because you are generally just as slackjawed, stupid, and hateful as you stereotype the rural individuals to be, except you have the distinct illusion that your shiat don't stink because you pack like rats into run down apartments and swear its the good life. Ever wonder why racial hate crimes take place in medium to large cities and less, far far less, in rural areas? Because we get to know the "black folk" we live with and tend to get along well with them. Perhaps if you spent less time stereotyping people and more time getting to know them, you wouldn't come across as so god damn wrong and so stupid.


How did I know you came from a podunk town, HOW DID I KNOW!?!!

First off, rural areas tend to be where the school massacre's happen FYI.  That means For Your Information, you 4th grade dropout.  Let me know if I talk to fast for you.  Actually, you know what, just keep your mouth shut.

Second, yes, cities have violent gun crimes.  That's because we have people of different cultures in close proximity (that means near each other dumbass) and easy access to lots of firearms is the last thing we want but God forbid one of you hillbilly sister farkers have your RIGHT to shoot at a government black helicopter when it comes to take away your moonshine trampled on, or whatever.

Third, you know why racial crimes happen in cities?  Because there are enough people of one race in an area that they can't be intimidated into silence when injustice happens.  There's never going to be any black riots in your town, if 3 trailer parks and a strip mall can actually be called a town, not because there's no injustice there but because they're outnumbered.
 
2013-02-03 03:54:35 PM

msupf: So is it not hypocritical for lapierre to criticize Obama for having security follow his high-profile target children when he himself (and his family) goes pretty much everywhere with a private armed security detail?

If you pay for yourself you can buy whatever you want in the security market. If you want "the government" to pay you shouldn't be surprised that they say that they will only protect high risk locations/persons.

The National Center for Education Statistics reports that ... Total Public and Private Schools. Adding the 2010-2011 public and private school totals, we get 132,270 schools, so currently there are over 132 thousand elementary and secondary schools in the United States.

And they don't know how many buildings there are. So you'll need at least 132.270 * wage + 132.270 * benefits for 1 full time position per school. Let's assume that a guard makes 40k a year and we'll be looking at a price tag of well over 5 billion dollar a year. That's just not justifiable for the amount of risk posed by a random nut showing up and shooting someone/some people.

 
2013-02-03 03:56:37 PM

kronicfeld: tenpoundsofcheese: Why is this "fark"? Fox proves time and again that they are fair and balanced.

This alt is getting stale.


Ten pounds of derp is at least occasionally amusing.
 
2013-02-03 03:56:51 PM

atomicmask: Look I do not want the government deciding who is worthy of personal defense and who is not. I think the law should apply to all people, risk or not, wealth or not, position or not.

I do not get how this is considered insane or trolling. It is farking frightening to me that you all are so backwards you honestly think that private rights and defense and equal protection under the law is trolling...


Statistically speaking when EVERYONE is telling you that you're insane or trolling it's much more likely that they are right and you're not.

Though I imagine you will continue your "only truly enlightened man bravely fighting the system like Galileo" schtick anyway.
 
2013-02-03 03:56:56 PM

atomicmask: Do you honestly believe uranium, or weapons grade plutonium, is easy enough to get your hands on it does not require a billion dollar factory to even produce the stuff? Do you not think that the high cost of creating accompanied by the extremely dangerous nature of getting such would not lead to very very strict methods (Which are already in place) of legally owning and getting such materials? Let alone the costs of weapons parts to even make such a bomb? You farkers need to stop watching 24 so damn much, its not that easy.


What, in your head, do you think those regulations and "very, very strict" methods are, if not laws banning the possession, purchase, and sale of the items you think it should be legal to possess, purchase, and sell?

Do you know why it is so prohibitively difficult to get your hands on weapons grade Uranium? BECAUSE IT IS HIGHLY CONTROLLED AND VERY, VERY ILLEGAL TO OWN. The exact thing you say should be removed, i.e. government's "hypocritical" standard that they can have fissile material and you can't, is exactly is what is causing the prohibitive barrier to entry that you are relying on to keep you safe. But forget nukes, what about land mines? They can't cost more than a few hundred dollars a pop, what about the crazy guy who decides to bury them in a public park? What about if Lanza's mom had really liked RPGs? They can't be more than a couple of grand, right? Especially not once the market opens up and demand drops the price down.
 
2013-02-03 03:58:15 PM

Tigger: atomicmask: Look I do not want the government deciding who is worthy of personal defense and who is not. I think the law should apply to all people, risk or not, wealth or not, position or not.

I do not get how this is considered insane or trolling. It is farking frightening to me that you all are so backwards you honestly think that private rights and defense and equal protection under the law is trolling...

Statistically speaking when EVERYONE is telling you that you're insane or trolling it's much more likely that they are right and you're not.

Though I imagine you will continue your "only truly enlightened man bravely fighting the system like Galileo" schtick anyway.


I think all that time out in Phoenix melted his brain.
 
2013-02-03 03:58:31 PM

ciberido: kronicfeld: tenpoundsofcheese: Why is this "fark"? Fox proves time and again that they are fair and balanced.

This alt is getting stale.

Ten pounds of derp is at least occasionally amusing.


Shut your whore mouth.
 
2013-02-03 03:59:41 PM

Daemonik: atomicmask: Daemonik: There are lots of people in the US who live in bumblefark little towns where everyone knows everyone else and sees no problems with everyone owning 300 firearms for "hunting" and keeping an eye on that black family that just moved in.  In NRA terms, their heartland.  These people will NEVER agree with even the most basic restraints on firearms, because they live in fear 24/7.  Fear of the government taking away their trailers, fear of brown people, fear of change, fear fear fear.

That is the sad truth.  They will rather that children go to school wearing ballistic armor than give up that fear.

Know what is funny about this? You are the most ignorant backwoods retard I  have ever met, and I live in one of these areas you stereotype and hate openly.

We don't live in fear because we know each other, we tend to like each other, and if we dont, we tend to avoid one another. Ever wonder why every shooting happens in one of your GLORIOUS and enlightened bastions of education and liberal utopias known as big cities? Because you are generally just as slackjawed, stupid, and hateful as you stereotype the rural individuals to be, except you have the distinct illusion that your shiat don't stink because you pack like rats into run down apartments and swear its the good life. Ever wonder why racial hate crimes take place in medium to large cities and less, far far less, in rural areas? Because we get to know the "black folk" we live with and tend to get along well with them. Perhaps if you spent less time stereotyping people and more time getting to know them, you wouldn't come across as so god damn wrong and so stupid.

How did I know you came from a podunk town, HOW DID I KNOW!?!!

First off, rural areas tend to be where the school massacre's happen FYI.  That means For Your Information, you 4th grade dropout.  Let me know if I talk to fast for you.  Actually, you know what, just keep your mouth shut.

Second, yes, cities have violent gun crimes.  That ...


Oh shiat you mean I miss out on Riots, rapes, murders, minorities in "no go" zones for other races, AND I can't deal with ultra-lib panzies that blame the whole thing on guns and not on the people that wield them?

Dear god, you have shown me the light. Where do I sign up to join you in your utopia of robbery, theft, murder, distrust of your neighbors, and general jackassery?

Yeah we intimidate all these poor minorities into behavin' so that we can have a civilized town where we sleep with the doors unlocked and generally look each other in the eyes when dealing. Its a hell. We can send our kids to school and not worry about them getting murdered, then they come home and we go hunting with them afterwards! Can you imagine the nightmare?! God damn, some kids even get GUNS for christmas and get this, they are just so backwoods and ignorant and inbred they do not even THINK about shooting another person with it cause they are just so damn simple! GAWWWWWD DAMN if only we had a fancy high tootin edumacation from one of them dar big cities where'en we could figure out how to murder people that look at us funny and steal if we can't afford what we want!

Damn you are indeed the envy of us
 
2013-02-03 04:01:16 PM

atomicmask: Actually everybody should be able to fight fires, especially those who have a vested interest in things not burning down. What a twisted world you all live in to think personal responsibility and protecting yourself as well as your property is "crazy"


I never said anything about stopping you from trying to put out a fire in your own house. But if, god forbid, your house were on fire, would you let anyone with a bucket and an ax who says "I want to help!" into your house?
 
2013-02-03 04:02:06 PM

nmrsnr: atomicmask: Do you honestly believe uranium, or weapons grade plutonium, is easy enough to get your hands on it does not require a billion dollar factory to even produce the stuff? Do you not think that the high cost of creating accompanied by the extremely dangerous nature of getting such would not lead to very very strict methods (Which are already in place) of legally owning and getting such materials? Let alone the costs of weapons parts to even make such a bomb? You farkers need to stop watching 24 so damn much, its not that easy.

What, in your head, do you think those regulations and "very, very strict" methods are, if not laws banning the possession, purchase, and sale of the items you think it should be legal to possess, purchase, and sell?

Do you know why it is so prohibitively difficult to get your hands on weapons grade Uranium? BECAUSE IT IS HIGHLY CONTROLLED AND VERY, VERY ILLEGAL TO OWN. The exact thing you say should be removed, i.e. government's "hypocritical" standard that they can have fissile material and you can't, is exactly is what is causing the prohibitive barrier to entry that you are relying on to keep you safe. But forget nukes, what about land mines? They can't cost more than a few hundred dollars a pop, what about the crazy guy who decides to bury them in a public park? What about if Lanza's mom had really liked RPGs? They can't be more than a couple of grand, right? Especially not once the market opens up and demand drops the price down.


I will have you know that we need access to land mines to stop the gopher menace!  Also, have you considered the amount of stray dogs & cats in the cities?  A few claymores and some tripwires, that problem is solved my friend.
 
2013-02-03 04:02:19 PM

nmrsnr: But if, god forbid, your house were on fire, would you let anyone with a bucket and an ax who says "I want to help!" into your house?


Nah, he'd just shot them for self-defense.
 
2013-02-03 04:02:21 PM

nmrsnr: atomicmask: Actually everybody should be able to fight fires, especially those who have a vested interest in things not burning down. What a twisted world you all live in to think personal responsibility and protecting yourself as well as your property is "crazy"

I never said anything about stopping you from trying to put out a fire in your own house. But if, god forbid, your house were on fire, would you let anyone with a bucket and an ax who says "I want to help!" into your house?


If my house is on fire? fark yes everyone with a bucket of water is damn well welcome to toss it on the fire.

Maybe you didn't think this analogy all the way threw?
 
2013-02-03 04:05:10 PM

atomicmask: Its a hell. We can send our kids to school and not worry about them getting murdered, then they come home and we go hunting with them afterwards!


We do that too, it's called the suburbs.

We never keep our doors unlocked though. That's just foolish.
 
2013-02-03 04:05:29 PM

Hetfield: RandomRandom: The NRA is doing a fantastic of de-legitimizing the NRA.  Every day, they're destroying their own influence.

How? I heard they gained a quarter of a million new members after the Newtown shootings. That's a massive increase and pretty much the opposite of losing influence.


It's not just the NRA.  I believe the GOA said they've seen a 30% increase in their membership.
 
Displayed 50 of 194 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report