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.

(NPR)   Will President Obama promise more of the same? Will there be an emotional tribute to the recent victims of gun violence? Will the Right overreact? Will Ted Nugent disappear forever? It's your official State of the Union Discussion Thread   (npr.org) divider line 2410
    More: Spiffy, State of the Union, President Obama, obama, gun violence, Brennan Center for Justice, second inaugural address, first State of the Union, President Bill Clinton  
•       •       •

1320 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Feb 2013 at 8:00 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



2410 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last
 
2013-02-12 01:03:58 PM

Popcorn Johnny: I saw an interview with Nugent yesterday on CNN.  He makes more sense than anybody else has on the issue and based on gun threads on Fark, I guarantee that most fakers would take his side rather than Obama's.


youmustbenewhere.jpg
 
2013-02-12 01:06:51 PM

give me doughnuts: Rand Paul (not to be confused with RON PAUL) is giving the Tea Party response.
Can we take this as an indication that the Tea Party will no longer be recognized as a part of the Republican Party?

Are we looking at the New Dixiecrats?


I think they're closer to the New Know-Nothings
 
2013-02-12 01:06:58 PM

Lurking Fear: I'm willing to bet Ted disrupts the event and is escorted out by the secret service.


Please be a wizard...please.  :)
 
2013-02-12 01:07:51 PM

Lionel Mandrake: snowjack: What's with all the ad-hominems? I'm not a Nugent fan, but everyone shiats their pants at some point.

Most of us stop before adulthood.

Of course, "adulthood" still doesn't apply to Teddy, but he should at least have the decency to wear diapers.


Well, I don't mean to get in the way of the hate. Just wanted to point out a couple things like certain medications, the flu, giardia, old age, IBD, Crohns, bowel cancer and other causes of adult pants-shiatting. That's all. Proceed.
 
2013-02-12 01:09:18 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Popcorn Johnny: I saw an interview with Nugent yesterday on CNN.  He makes more sense than anybody else has on the issue and based on gun threads on Fark, I guarantee that most fakers would take his side rather than Obama's.

youmustbenewhere.jpg


I agree. Most fake tough guys would absolutely identify more with Ted than Obama

That first part about Ted making sense is hilarious as well
 
2013-02-12 01:09:56 PM

phaseolus: Lurking Fear: I'm willing to bet Ted disrupts the event and is escorted out by the secret service.


No, he'll just sit there with Stockman where they'll both do some minor attention-whoring, hoping to recreate some Joe Wilson "you lie" magic on their own. Problem is that's been done before, and lacking any particular wit or cleverness they won't be able to do much besides leave most people with the impression that they're immature disrespectful little twits. Nothing noteworthy will happen unless one of them gets really frustrated that they're being ignored by Obama and the Secret Service.

Unfortunately the TV directors will make sure some of their cameras are pointed at them the whole time in the hopes that something weird will happen, so we'll be treated to continuous views of Nugent's American-Flag-and-Camouflage fashion ensemble, untrimmed eyebrow and nose hair, and whatever stupid hat he decides to keep on his head the whole time.


Which reminds me, I thought it was weird that there were cameras pointed right at Joe Wilson at the precise moment he blurted out his completely unplanned outburst. Some unknown backbencher and there were multiple cameras focused right on him. Weird.

Anyway, yes, there will be cameras trained on Ted the whole time, hoping for an 'unscripted' outburst. I don't think there will be one, but he will certainly be playing to the cameras.
 
2013-02-12 01:16:31 PM
I think Obama and Congress should make a "Harlem Shake" video at the SOTU.
 
2013-02-12 01:22:35 PM

snowjack: Lionel Mandrake: snowjack: What's with all the ad-hominems? I'm not a Nugent fan, but everyone shiats their pants at some point.

Most of us stop before adulthood.

Of course, "adulthood" still doesn't apply to Teddy, but he should at least have the decency to wear diapers.

Well, I don't mean to get in the way of the hate. Just wanted to point out a couple things like certain medications, the flu, giardia, old age, IBD, Crohns, bowel cancer and other causes of adult pants-shiatting. That's all. Proceed.


Another "cause" of adult pants-shiatting: being a tough-talking, gun-happy, pro-military, camouflage-wearing macho man who intentionally shiats his pants to avoid military service.

Not quite the same as Crohn's, is it?
 
2013-02-12 01:25:30 PM

Lionel Mandrake: The Stealth Hippopotamus: nekom: That's about all the capacity he has to do. What's the criminal penalty for such disruptions anyway? Disorderly conduct and a few hours in the tank? $50 and time served when you go see the night court judge?

no way he's going to do anything of the sort. He's trying the be responsible face of gun ownership.

I bet he even tears up a little during the exploitation moving tribute to the memory of the children of Sandy Hook.

First: LOL

Second: As a gun-control advocate, I say "keep up the good work, Ted"  You and Wayne are making enormous strides for the cause of gun control.


Which in turn is doing wonders for gun and ammunition manufacturers.
 
2013-02-12 01:28:37 PM

Darth_Lukecash: I doubt it very much. His persona is to be the "crazy" rocker and to be passionate. The last calm intellegent spokesperson amoung rockers was Zappa taking on censorship.


Nugent is for keeping guns out of the hands or criminals and the mentally ill, as well as imposing tougher laws for people illegally possessing weapons.  He also opposes bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Obama is for a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Now tell me, which side are most gun loving farkers on?
 
2013-02-12 01:29:44 PM

Krymson Tyde: Lionel Mandrake: The Stealth Hippopotamus: nekom: That's about all the capacity he has to do. What's the criminal penalty for such disruptions anyway? Disorderly conduct and a few hours in the tank? $50 and time served when you go see the night court judge?

no way he's going to do anything of the sort. He's trying the be responsible face of gun ownership.

I bet he even tears up a little during the exploitation moving tribute to the memory of the children of Sandy Hook.

First: LOL

Second: As a gun-control advocate, I say "keep up the good work, Ted"  You and Wayne are making enormous strides for the cause of gun control.

Which in turn is doing wonders for gun and ammunition manufacturers.


Which in turn makes Wayne a happy man.  It's not like he cares about gun owners.

He's more than happy to stoke stupid people to buy his bosses' products.
 
2013-02-12 01:30:17 PM

phaseolus: So ... your comment, the first one, was basically meaningless then?


Not really. There are more people that say they dislike the President than people who says they dislike the NRA. That's what the poll shows.

I'm just wondering what would happen if they were given an option C.
 
2013-02-12 01:34:54 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Darth_Lukecash: I doubt it very much. His persona is to be the "crazy" rocker and to be passionate. The last calm intellegent spokesperson amoung rockers was Zappa taking on censorship.

Nugent is for keeping guns out of the hands or criminals and the mentally ill, as well as imposing tougher laws for people illegally possessing weapons.  He also opposes bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Obama is for a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Now tell me, which side are most gun loving farkers on?


Well, duh.  Are you trying to make a point of some kind?
 
2013-02-12 01:35:03 PM
I want to see Obama throwing strings of beads at members of Congress tonight.

No flashing is necessary, Representatives.
 
2013-02-12 01:38:25 PM

bobbette: I want to see Obama throwing strings of beads at members of Congress tonight.

No flashing is necessary, Representatives.


There will be exceptions...

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-02-12 01:39:43 PM
Obama: Now I understand everyone's shiat's emotional right now, but I've got a 3 point plan that's going to fix EVERYTHING
Pelosi: Break it down, Obama!
Obama: Number 1: We've got this guy Joe Biden.  Number 2: He's got a higher IQ than ANY MAN ALIVE, and Number 3: He's going to fix EVERYTHING
 
2013-02-12 01:40:44 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Now tell me, which side are most gun loving farkers on?


Fark, as a community, has a very complex stand on gun control. Youve got your pro NRA shills, your libertarian ITGs, and a full spectrum of gun control advocates all the way from better background checks to taking away everything but hunting rifles.

Good luck finding a "side" to troll.
 
2013-02-12 01:41:25 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Well, duh.  Are you trying to make a point of some kind?


I made my point, most Farkers are on Nugent's side.  You're in the minority here, accept that and move on.
 
2013-02-12 01:46:42 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: Well, duh.  Are you trying to make a point of some kind?

I made my point, most Farkers are on Nugent's side.  You're in the minority here, accept that and move on.


Yeah, most "gun loving" farkers.

And whether I'm in the minority on a particular issue or not is irrelevant.  I don't form my views on the basis of popularity.

Nugent is a fkn idiot.  Even if his views can be and are advocated by calm, rational, intelligent people (and they can be and they are), Nugent himself is a fkn moran, and as I've said, ultimately a benefit for the advocates of gun control.  So keep putting the Motor City Madman (vroom-vroom!!) on that pedestal.  And, on behalf of gun control advocates, I say "thank you."
 
2013-02-12 01:48:37 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Krymson Tyde: Lionel Mandrake: The Stealth Hippopotamus: nekom: That's about all the capacity he has to do. What's the criminal penalty for such disruptions anyway? Disorderly conduct and a few hours in the tank? $50 and time served when you go see the night court judge?

no way he's going to do anything of the sort. He's trying the be responsible face of gun ownership.

I bet he even tears up a little during the exploitation moving tribute to the memory of the children of Sandy Hook.

First: LOL

Second: As a gun-control advocate, I say "keep up the good work, Ted"  You and Wayne are making enormous strides for the cause of gun control.

Which in turn is doing wonders for gun and ammunition manufacturers.

Which in turn makes Wayne a happy man.  It's not like he cares about gun owners.

He's more than happy to stoke stupid people to buy his bosses' products.


Yep, the rubes are being fleeced and played.
 
2013-02-12 01:50:22 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Darth_Lukecash: I doubt it very much. His persona is to be the "crazy" rocker and to be passionate. The last calm intellegent spokesperson amoung rockers was Zappa taking on censorship.

Nugent is for keeping guns out of the hands or criminals and the mentally ill, as well as imposing tougher laws for people illegally possessing weapons.  He also opposes bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Obama is for a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Now tell me, which side are most gun loving farkers on?


If Ted is the voice of reason for your side of the debate, you're farked
 
2013-02-12 01:52:44 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Nugent is a fkn idiot. Even if his views can be and are advocated by calm, rational, intelligent people (and they can be and they are), Nugent himself is a fkn moran, and as I've said, ultimately a benefit for the advocates of gun control. So keep putting the Motor City Madman (vroom-vroom!!) on that pedestal. And, on behalf of gun control advocates, I say "thank you."


I found Ted Nugent wildly attractive when I was a 14 year old nympho in the 70s.

/I was an idiot
//had a lot of fun though
 
2013-02-12 01:53:35 PM
Please, God. Please force The Nuge to have a complete mental breakdown in the middle of it and then the Secret Service is forced to put him down like a rabid dog.
 
2013-02-12 01:54:42 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Darth_Lukecash: I doubt it very much. His persona is to be the "crazy" rocker and to be passionate. The last calm intellegent spokesperson amoung rockers was Zappa taking on censorship.

Nugent is for keeping guns out of the hands or criminals and the mentally ill, as well as imposing tougher laws for people illegally possessing weapons.  He also opposes bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Obama is for a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

Now tell me, which side are most gun loving farkers on?


Most people want the high magazine capability gone. There is no logical need for it outside a military/police

The assult rifle is really the only thing that's Congreve
 
2013-02-12 01:55:23 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: It would be funny if Ted tries to citizen's arrest the illegal immigrant.

seriously, we now invite illegal immigrants to the SOTU?


Well, it seemed only natural since he's giving the speech
 
2013-02-12 01:59:10 PM

Darth_Lukecash: Most people want the high magazine capability gone. There is no logical need for it outside a military/police


Most people?  The fact that some (Including Obama) are trying for a magazine ban just goes to prove how farking stupid people are on the issue.   What difference would  nine ten round magazines make over three thirty round magazines in the Case of Sandy Hook, the Batman theater shooting, Columbine, or 99% of the other mass shootings in the country?  Life is not a movie, where you flank the enemy and take them out when they stop to reload.
 
2013-02-12 01:59:59 PM
"The state of our union is... smooth. We got this unemployment, you see, and the trend is that it's going all the way down, right where you like it. Yeah, you yourself got a job, baby. We all got jobs here tonight, and the CBO reports that my service sector is looking to fill some rewarding positions tonight, if you let me check a little of your background. I'm investing in you, America, and I can't wait to see your dividends."
 
2013-02-12 02:10:43 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Darth_Lukecash: Most people want the high magazine capability gone. There is no logical need for it outside a military/police

Most people?  The fact that some (Including Obama) are trying for a magazine ban just goes to prove how farking stupid people are on the issue.   What difference would  nine ten round magazines make over three thirty round magazines in the Case of Sandy Hook, the Batman theater shooting, Columbine, or 99% of the other mass shootings in the country?  Life is not a movie, where you flank the enemy and take them out when they stop to reload.


Except for Loughner, who was taken down when he stopped to reload.
 
2013-02-12 02:14:22 PM
Darth_Lukecash:
Most people want the high magazine capability gone. There is no logical need for it outside a military/police

The assult rifle is really the only thing that's Congreve


Rhetorical question: If there's no logical need for 10+ round magazines among non-police, why do the police need them? If 10 rounds should always be enough to take control of any life-threatening situation civilians might find themselves in, why would the police ever need more than that?

Assault rifles are not the same thing as assault weapons, by the way. An assault rifle is a true military selective-fire weapon. "Assault weapon" is a legal term the gun control advocates came up with to impose regulations on civilian grade sport rifles that have "scary-looking" features like detachable magazines, pistol grips, and telescoping stocks.
 
2013-02-12 02:14:50 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Except for Loughner, who was taken down when he stopped to reload.


That's why I said 99% of the time, there are rare exceptions to the rule.  In the case of Sandy Hook, it wouldn't have mattered if the guy had a single shot rifle.
 
2013-02-12 02:17:43 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: Except for Loughner, who was taken down when he stopped to reload.

That's why I said 99% of the time, there are rare exceptions to the rule.  In the case of Sandy Hook, it wouldn't have mattered if the guy had a single shot rifle.


 I'll have to take your word for it.  I'm not privy to how things unfold in alternate universes.
 
2013-02-12 02:21:20 PM

Lionel Mandrake: I'll have to take your word for it.  I'm not privy to how things unfold in alternate universes.


We know how it unfolded and we also know that police were on scene for 40 minutes before entering the school.
 
2013-02-12 02:24:55 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: I'll have to take your word for it.  I'm not privy to how things unfold in alternate universes.

We know how it unfolded and we also know that police were on scene for 40 minutes before entering the school.


Yes, we know how it unfolded.  We do not know how it would have unfolded if -
 
2013-02-12 02:28:23 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: Except for Loughner, who was taken down when he stopped to reload.

That's why I said 99% of the time, there are rare exceptions to the rule.  In the case of Sandy Hook, it wouldn't have mattered if the guy had a single shot rifle.

 I'll have to take your word for it.  I'm not privy to how things unfold in alternate universes.


Honest question: do you support the 2nd amendment at all? Do you think Americans should have the right to own and carry any guns?
 
2013-02-12 02:33:24 PM

snowjack: Lionel Mandrake: Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: Except for Loughner, who was taken down when he stopped to reload.

That's why I said 99% of the time, there are rare exceptions to the rule.  In the case of Sandy Hook, it wouldn't have mattered if the guy had a single shot rifle.

 I'll have to take your word for it.  I'm not privy to how things unfold in alternate universes.

Honest question: do you support the 2nd amendment at all? Do you think Americans should have the right to own and carry any guns?


Yes.  But I believe that like all other rights, the 2nd Amendment has limits (unless you believe in the over-the-counter sale of howitzers without a background check, or something).   I simply draw that line in a different place than people like Ted Nugent.

Do you automatically assume that everyone with a differing opinion is a gun-grabber who wants to ban all firearms?
 
2013-02-12 02:33:48 PM

snowjack: Honest question


No it's not. It's a trap question. Don't be an ass.

No one but no one, including LM, has said "Let's take away ALL the guns." The MOST extreme thing we've been hearing from anyone making actual proposals, is "Let's limit magazine size and require a universal background check."

Anything more than that - anyone worried about or talking about getting rid of the 2nd amendment, for example - is just strawman arguments made by people who can't reasonably oppose what's actually on the table.
 
2013-02-12 02:38:07 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Except for Loughner, who was taken down when he stopped to reload.


That and it's helpful in the general sense to lessen the amount of time bullets can by flying through the air. I just watched a video of a guy reloading an AR-15 in about seven seconds, but I'll round it up to ten to account for the pandemonium of your first mass killing spree. Our non-hypothetical gunman is in a room full of kindergartners, and takes four seconds to target each child and pop two rounds in its chest (this is the most horrific math question I've ever seen). So for a thirty round magazine, he takes down fifteen kids in sixty seconds, then takes ten to reload.

That high-capacity mag has a downtime of about 14.3%.

With a ten round magazine, he kills five kids in twenty seconds, then takes ten to reload. To kill the fifteen, he would need to spend a minute shooting and thirty seconds reloading, making his downtime about 33.3%. With the high capacity magazine, he could kill forty-five children in 3m30s. With smaller magazines, he would need to spend 4m30s doing the same horrific act, so the simple fix of limiting magazine sizes reduces the effectiveness of mass murdering psychopaths by about 28.6%, just in the amount of kindergarteners they can shoot in a given time frame.

Given that the first few minutes are the most crucial while waiting for law enforcement, any delay saves a number of lives that wouldn't have been saved otherwise. Limiting magazine size is at its very worst a minor annoyance for legal gun owners on the level of a shoelace coming untied, and at its best will save a handful of kindergarteners the next time someone loses their mind.
 
2013-02-12 02:40:46 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Lionel Mandrake: Except for Loughner, who was taken down when he stopped to reload.

That and it's helpful in the general sense to lessen the amount of time bullets can by flying through the air. I just watched a video of a guy reloading an AR-15 in about seven seconds, but I'll round it up to ten to account for the pandemonium of your first mass killing spree. Our non-hypothetical gunman is in a room full of kindergartners, and takes four seconds to target each child and pop two rounds in its chest (this is the most horrific math question I've ever seen). So for a thirty round magazine, he takes down fifteen kids in sixty seconds, then takes ten to reload.

That high-capacity mag has a downtime of about 14.3%.

With a ten round magazine, he kills five kids in twenty seconds, then takes ten to reload. To kill the fifteen, he would need to spend a minute shooting and thirty seconds reloading, making his downtime about 33.3%. With the high capacity magazine, he could kill forty-five children in 3m30s. With smaller magazines, he would need to spend 4m30s doing the same horrific act, so the simple fix of limiting magazine sizes reduces the effectiveness of mass murdering psychopaths by about 28.6%, just in the amount of kindergarteners they can shoot in a given time frame.

Given that the first few minutes are the most crucial while waiting for law enforcement, any delay saves a number of lives that wouldn't have been saved otherwise. Limiting magazine size is at its very worst a minor annoyance for legal gun owners on the level of a shoelace coming untied, and at its best will save a handful of kindergarteners the next time someone loses their mind.


Damn, that's cold.
 
2013-02-12 02:47:16 PM

unlikely: snowjack: Honest question

No it's not. It's a trap question. Don't be an ass.



No one but no one, including LM, has said "Let's take away ALL the guns." The MOST extreme thing we've been hearing from anyone making actual proposals, is "Let's limit magazine size and require a universal background check."

Anything more than that - anyone worried about or talking about getting rid of the 2nd amendment, for example - is just strawman arguments made by people who can't reasonably oppose what's actually on the table.


encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.comencrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

And if anyone, anywhere is, they need to STFU
 
2013-02-12 02:47:37 PM

propasaurus: Damn, that's cold.


I find it best to remind people that the gun control debate isn't an academic hypothetical. If someone truly believes that it is their inalienable right to have a thirty-round magazine because otherwise they will suffer a minor inconvenience when they're shooting at beer cans in their backyard, they should be aware that a psychotic mass murderer will be twice as effective at gunning down children when the next inevitable mass murder takes place.

But hey, don't tread on me and all that. Land of the free, home of the brave.
 
2013-02-12 02:57:48 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Honest question: do you support the 2nd amendment at all? Do you think Americans should have the right to own and carry any guns?

Yes. But I believe that like all other rights, the 2nd Amendment has limits (unless you believe in the over-the-counter sale of howitzers without a background check, or something). I simply draw that line in a different place than people like Ted Nugent.

Do you automatically assume that everyone with a differing opinion is a gun-grabber who wants to ban all firearms?


No. There are people posting on Fark who do think the US should ban all firearms. I was just curious whether you were one of them.

I was trying to establish a base that we can agree on. We agree that law abiding Americans should be allowed to carry guns, and that howitzers should be highly regulated. As they are.

Guns are already very highly regulated. As a gun owner, I can tell you there is a lot you have to know, and a lot of regulations and safety practices you have to be very diligent about in order to be a responsible gun owner. As it should be. All guns are deadly. But the fact remains, as long as Americans own guns, there will continue to be tragedies that happen involving those guns. Why all the hair splitting over whether the gun can hold 10 rounds or 30? Why do Americans assume that passing these new proposed regulations will make more than 0.00001% difference in actual prevention of violence? Violent people will still be violent.

This will accomplish almost NOTHING, except what it is really intended to do: making politicians and their constituents feel like they have responded to the recent tragedies.

I do not support Nugent, I do not support the NRA. But these proposals are a hysterical response, at the level of taking nude photos of every airline passenger.

 
2013-02-12 03:03:21 PM

snowjack: Guns are already very highly regulated. As a gun owner, I can tell you there is a lot you have to know, and a lot of regulations and safety practices you have to be very diligent about in order to be a responsible gun owner.


What sorts of regulations and safety practices do you have to follow in order to just be a legal gun owner?
 
2013-02-12 03:04:23 PM
Adios dear thread we hardly knew ye.
 
2013-02-12 03:08:47 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: snowjack: Guns are already very highly regulated. As a gun owner, I can tell you there is a lot you have to know, and a lot of regulations and safety practices you have to be very diligent about in order to be a responsible gun owner.

What sorts of regulations and safety practices do you have to follow in order to just be a legal gun owner?


Far fewer, but I'm also happy that I live in a free country, rather than somewhere everything not prohibited is compulsory.
 
2013-02-12 03:10:13 PM

snowjack: This will accomplish almost NOTHING, except what it is really intended to do: making politicians and their constituents feel like they have responded to the recent tragedies.

I do not support Nugent, I do not support the NRA. But these proposals are a hysterical response, at the level of taking nude photos of every airline passenger.


I agree.  But I also think the reaction against these proposals is even more hysterical.  And accomplishing almost nothing is synonymous with accomplishing  something.  No one with two or more functioning brain cells thinks that these moderate proposals are going to usher in a new era of vastly reduced gun violence, but it's a step.

And I think that many defenders of the status quo (and those who even want to loosen restrictions) are proving themselves to be pretty stupid for letting morans like LaPierre and Nugent take center stage for them.
 
2013-02-12 03:10:36 PM

quickdraw: Popcorn Johnny: Now tell me, which side are most gun loving farkers on?

Fark, as a community, has a very complex stand on gun control. Youve got your pro NRA shills, your libertarian ITGs, and a full spectrum of gun control advocates all the way from better background checks to taking away everything but hunting rifles.

Good luck finding a "side" to troll.


To expand that spectrum, we have the pants shiatting afraid of guns types, the violence policy center shills, the constitutional and historical revisionists, the authoritarian "liberals", the people who for some reason project their penis size onto responsible gun owners, the people who can't get the terminology right, the people who ignore data that should otherwise dispel their irrational fear of certain guns, the people who can't articulate what they would ban or why they would ban it. Et farking cetera
 
2013-02-12 03:12:43 PM

Lionel Mandrake: I agree.  But I also think the reaction against these proposals is even more hysterical.  And accomplishing almost nothing is synonymous with accomplishing  something.  No one with two or more functioning brain cells thinks that these moderate proposals are going to usher in a new era of vastly reduced gun violence, but it's a step.


Also: no one with two or more functioning brain cells thinks these moderate proposals are going to lead to teams of federal agents sweeping through the country to confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens.  And, then there's Ted...
 
2013-02-12 03:20:32 PM
It'd be great if at the end of the address, Obama asks Ted Nugent to stand up as a rep of the NRA, then asks him about his Vietnam service.
 
2013-02-12 03:26:47 PM

snowjack: Darth_Lukecash:
Most people want the high magazine capability gone. There is no logical need for it outside a military/police

The assult rifle is really the only thing that's Congreve

Rhetorical question: If there's no logical need for 10+ round magazines among non-police, why do the police need them? If 10 rounds should always be enough to take control of any life-threatening situation civilians might find themselves in, why would the police ever need more than that?

Assault rifles are not the same thing as assault weapons, by the way. An assault rifle is a true military selective-fire weapon. "Assault weapon" is a legal term the gun control advocates came up with to impose regulations on civilian grade sport rifles that have "scary-looking" features like detachable magazines, pistol grips, and telescoping stocks.


If there are truely no difference in the rifles performance with theses features, then you won't miss them, and a regular rifle will do. Unless you need that fold out stock to conceale the weapon from the deer. Have that 30 rounds, in case a herd is armed, and a flash suppressor so you won't give away your position to the squirrels.

Keep in mind, the second amendment was created because we had no standing army... The civilians and local militias were our defense.

You can have arms, just not everyone.
 
2013-02-12 03:35:33 PM
Much derp will be spewed. Some will rejoice at it, others will want to kill a lib. Do i win?
 
Displayed 50 of 2410 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report