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.

(Denver Channel)   NRA takes a shot at making robocalls in Newtown, CT   (thedenverchannel.com) divider line 647
    More: Dumbass, NRA, Newtown, Connecticut, Sandy Hook Elementary School  
•       •       •

6170 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Mar 2013 at 9:46 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-25 11:01:05 PM

pedrop357: Craptastic: I'm not sure what "talking point" I'm being accused of using. My only point is that I think that guns should be more difficult to obtain, and that the NRA is an organization full of dumb f*cks who are afraid that the "libruls" are going to take away their guns. WTF are you talking about?

Nice walkback.



"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
 
2013-03-25 11:01:30 PM

dave2198: Since our government doesn't have a track record of being capable to regulate much of anything on the internet, I chose an example that wasn't retarded.

Point still stands. Regulation does not kill free speech.


No, you evaded it by using the FCC/airwaves example despite the unique, unusual, and continuously questioned exercise of authority there.  Even then, their power to limit speech on the airwaves is very narrow.

You claimed that banning large classes of firearms was not a rights violation because you can still own other types of firearms.

As such, it would follow that it's OK for the government to ban HBO or movies on HBO, or posting on fark.com and still not violate the 1st amendment.
 
2013-03-25 11:02:14 PM
pedrop - I was trying to express that the people and those in the militia ARE two different things.  The old lady who can't cut it in the militia and isn't in any organized militia doesn't lose her right to bear arms and she can own the exact same arms that the (organized) militia itself uses.

  I was trying to express that the people and those in the militia ARE two different things. The manic depressive/psychopath who can't cut it in the militia and isn't in any organized militia doesn't lose their right to bear arms .......

due respect, pedrop - your posts in this thread are weak - I understand where you are trying to go, but your arguments look like the dotted-lined Billy's paths from the "Family Circus" cartoons
 
2013-03-25 11:02:35 PM

pedrop357: dave2198: Let's think of this a different way. Let's say a fire killed these kids. Arson. One robocall comes from a group trying to regulate access to the materials used to start the fire, in an attempt to limit future suffering, and one robocall comes from a group trying to protect the rights of arsonists.

You see no difference here?

0/10

Nice try.


It becomes more difficult to answer once I take the object of your affection out of the equation, doesn't it?
 
2013-03-25 11:02:38 PM

Giltric: Marcus Aurelius: Propain_az: Just for the record, I turned in my 2 AR-15s, My AR-10, and my two hand guns to the police.  I couldn't live with them anymore.  Too dangerous.

I don't know about the hand guns, but the ARs could jam any time.  Usually when it's inconvenient.

/all guns should be registered and insured and locked up tight

According to the Chief of Police of Milwaukee during Feinsteins hearing on gun control. 90% of the perpetrators of firearm related homicide are felons with prior convictions and 80% of their victims are felons with prior convictions. Both of which are excluded from owning or possessing firearms due to felonies on record.

Do you think they would purchase insurance, lock their firearms up or register them?

The goal of gun control is to turn law abiding citizens like many firearms owners hear on Fark into criminals.

It is nothing more than thought crime due to the potential death that a firearm may create.


So how do you explain the fact that NRA is opposed to closing the gun show loophole and strengthening background checks?
 
2013-03-25 11:03:32 PM

dave2198: Giltric: Craptastic: Giltric: You didn't address the part about turning tragedy into a sales pitch when the gun control side is doing it.

WTF are you talking about? The NRA uses this tragedy to sell more guns, and the anti-gun folks use this tragedy to discourage the access to guns. What am I supposed to address?


So it is a hysterical example when who does it?

I was trying to gauge if you had any principles.

Let's think of this a different way. Let's say a fire killed these kids. Arson. One robocall comes from a group trying to regulate access to the materials used to start the fire, in an attempt to limit future suffering, and one robocall comes from a group trying to protect the rights of arsonists.

You see no difference here?


Arson is a crime. Killing people whether they are kids or adults is a crime. Owning gasoline is not a crime neither should owning firearms.
 
2013-03-25 11:04:50 PM
I am weak and frightened. But the NRA tells me I am powerful and women admire me!
 
2013-03-25 11:05:12 PM

violentsalvation: James F. Campbell: You know, if liberals actually hated America, they'd be all for the proliferation of handguns.

If "liberals" were actually liberal they wouldn't be trying to shiat on rights they don't like.


typical derp.  Can't hear what's being said for the noises in the head.
 
2013-03-25 11:05:38 PM

Craptastic: Giltric: Craptastic: Giltric: You didn't address the part about turning tragedy into a sales pitch when the gun control side is doing it.

WTF are you talking about? The NRA uses this tragedy to sell more guns, and the anti-gun folks use this tragedy to discourage the access to guns. What am I supposed to address?


So it is a hysterical example when who does it?

I was trying to gauge if you had any principles.

Huh? If you're trying to score some internet-points, you should be more precise. Otherwise, you just look like a drooling knuckle-dragger. What "principles" are you trying to "gauge"?


I almost feel bad discussing this with you. I've already got you to the point where you are angry and flustered and calling people names with almost no effort on my part.
 
2013-03-25 11:06:09 PM

Giltric: According to the Chief of Police of Milwaukee during Feinsteins hearing on gun control. 90% of the perpetrators of firearm related homicide are felons with prior convictions and 80% of their victims are felons with prior convictions. Both of which are excluded from owning or possessing firearms due to felonies on record.

Do you think they would purchase insurance, lock their firearms up or register them?

The goal of gun control is to turn law abiding citizens like many firearms owners hear on Fark into criminals.

It is nothing more than thought crime due to the potential death that a firearm may create.


To my mind keeping your guns locked up is a good idea, gov't mandated or not.  I don't want anybody f*cking around with my guns without my knowledge, especially kids visiting the house with zero gun training except that they go BANG in the movies.

The better question is where the felons in that police chief's testimony are getting their firearms....Unregistered sales over Craigslist / straw buyers / out of the trunk of the car at the gunshow parking lot?  Those are the shiatstains the ATF needs to be after.
 
2013-03-25 11:06:10 PM

pedrop357: dave2198: Since our government doesn't have a track record of being capable to regulate much of anything on the internet, I chose an example that wasn't retarded.

Point still stands. Regulation does not kill free speech.

No, you evaded it by using the FCC/airwaves example despite the unique, unusual, and continuously questioned exercise of authority there.  Even then, their power to limit speech on the airwaves is very narrow.

You claimed that banning large classes of firearms was not a rights violation because you can still own other types of firearms.

As such, it would follow that it's OK for the government to ban HBO or movies on HBO, or posting on fark.com and still not violate the 1st amendment.


The government bans all kinds of things from appearing on cable TV.

And? Do you feel oppressed since you can't get the NAMBLA HD station on your network?
 
2013-03-25 11:07:00 PM

novalord2: Giltric: Marcus Aurelius: Propain_az: Just for the record, I turned in my 2 AR-15s, My AR-10, and my two hand guns to the police.  I couldn't live with them anymore.  Too dangerous.

I don't know about the hand guns, but the ARs could jam any time.  Usually when it's inconvenient.

/all guns should be registered and insured and locked up tight

According to the Chief of Police of Milwaukee during Feinsteins hearing on gun control. 90% of the perpetrators of firearm related homicide are felons with prior convictions and 80% of their victims are felons with prior convictions. Both of which are excluded from owning or possessing firearms due to felonies on record.

Do you think they would purchase insurance, lock their firearms up or register them?

The goal of gun control is to turn law abiding citizens like many firearms owners hear on Fark into criminals.

It is nothing more than thought crime due to the potential death that a firearm may create.

So how do you explain the fact that NRA is opposed to closing the gun show loophole and strengthening background checks?


Define "gun show loophole". I am unfamiliar with the term.
 
2013-03-25 11:07:13 PM
Sounds like just the sort of thing a dirty-playing bunch of hoplophobes would pull.  It's ridiculously easy to fake numbers on caller ID.
 
2013-03-25 11:10:14 PM

Bonzo_1116: Giltric: According to the Chief of Police of Milwaukee during Feinsteins hearing on gun control. 90% of the perpetrators of firearm related homicide are felons with prior convictions and 80% of their victims are felons with prior convictions. Both of which are excluded from owning or possessing firearms due to felonies on record.

Do you think they would purchase insurance, lock their firearms up or register them?

The goal of gun control is to turn law abiding citizens like many firearms owners hear on Fark into criminals.

It is nothing more than thought crime due to the potential death that a firearm may create.

To my mind keeping your guns locked up is a good idea, gov't mandated or not.  I don't want anybody f*cking around with my guns without my knowledge, especially kids visiting the house with zero gun training except that they go BANG in the movies.

The better question is where the felons in that police chief's testimony are getting their firearms....Unregistered sales over Craigslist / straw buyers / out of the trunk of the car at the gunshow parking lot?  Those are the shiatstains the ATF needs to be after.


By their own admittance they are getting them from straw purchasers who are usually family members, from other people who have stolen them or aquired them through a straw purchase or another way and by stealing them.
 
2013-03-25 11:10:17 PM

dave2198: The government bans all kinds of things from appearing on cable TV.

And? Do you feel oppressed since you can't get the NAMBLA HD station on your network?


I wasn't aware that NAMBLA had a channel, but if they did, the government couldn't ban it.  They could ban any child pornography (which is banned irrespective of the medium), but no the channel itself.

Still no answer about whether the government can ban HBO or fark.com and not violate the 1st amendment?
 
2013-03-25 11:10:47 PM

Giltric: Marcus Aurelius: Propain_az: Just for the record, I turned in my 2 AR-15s, My AR-10, and my two hand guns to the police.  I couldn't live with them anymore.  Too dangerous.

I don't know about the hand guns, but the ARs could jam any time.  Usually when it's inconvenient.

/all guns should be registered and insured and locked up tight

According to the Chief of Police of Milwaukee during Feinsteins hearing on gun control. 90% of the perpetrators of firearm related homicide are felons with prior convictions and 80% of their victims are felons with prior convictions. Both of which are excluded from owning or possessing firearms due to felonies on record.

Do you think they would purchase insurance, lock their firearms up or register them?

The goal of gun control is to turn law abiding citizens like many firearms owners hear on Fark into criminals.

It is nothing more than thought crime due to the potential death that a firearm may create.


Up until very recently in PA, if you were turned down for a CC, you could apply for a permit in Florida, which would be granted perfunctoraly.  It's the wild wild west here.  But the REAL problem is the people that are allowed to sell weapons on the street.  In a lot of places Uncle Joey can sell you a cheap assed 38 for $200 out of his trunk no questions asked.  Not in PA.  You can own a howitzer in PA, but you can't transfer a weapon without a dealer doing a background check.  So the hardware flows out of places like Florida and moves to wherever its needed.
 
2013-03-25 11:11:49 PM

Giltric: dave2198: Giltric: Craptastic: Giltric: You didn't address the part about turning tragedy into a sales pitch when the gun control side is doing it.

WTF are you talking about? The NRA uses this tragedy to sell more guns, and the anti-gun folks use this tragedy to discourage the access to guns. What am I supposed to address?


So it is a hysterical example when who does it?

I was trying to gauge if you had any principles.

Let's think of this a different way. Let's say a fire killed these kids. Arson. One robocall comes from a group trying to regulate access to the materials used to start the fire, in an attempt to limit future suffering, and one robocall comes from a group trying to protect the rights of arsonists.

You see no difference here?

Arson is a crime. Killing people whether they are kids or adults is a crime. Owning gasoline is not a crime neither should owning firearms.


What if they used an accelerant more exotic than gasoline? One that is highly dangerous to own without proper care? Gasoline would seem to be the handgun or hunting rifle of accelerants... You can find it easily and buy it without much trouble.  It's not the best example to use here.
 
2013-03-25 11:12:28 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Up until very recently in PA, if you were turned down for a CC, you could apply for a permit in Florida, which would be granted perfunctoraly. It's the wild wild west here. But the REAL problem is the people that are allowed to sell weapons on the street. In a lot of places Uncle Joey can sell you a cheap assed 38 for $200 out of his trunk no questions asked. Not in PA. You can own a howitzer in PA, but you can't transfer a weapon without a dealer doing a background check. So the hardware flows out of places like Florida and moves to wherever its needed.


What was stupid is that they could have just done what a lot of states do and simply require that residents have a resident permit.  This wouldn't have caused problems for out-of-state residents with FL permits.
 
2013-03-25 11:12:59 PM
pedrop No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

actually? no

the right to free speech is subject to a number of restrictions, as it the right to vote (are you a convict in florida?), marry (we all know this one), the right to privacy (unless there is a warrant), the right to end a pregnancy is restricted by a time-frame...

in fact? the only truly unfettered right i can think of off-hand is the freedom of religion and we seem to restrict that largely by bigotry in some aspects.
 
2013-03-25 11:13:27 PM

dave2198: What if they used an accelerant more exotic than gasoline? One that is highly dangerous to own without proper care? Gasoline would seem to be the handgun or hunting rifle of accelerants... You can find it easily and buy it without much trouble. It's not the best example to use here.


Still protected.

You're confusing (deliberately it seems) the harm with the means.
 
2013-03-25 11:13:36 PM
What I want to know is:
WHO at the NRA thought this was a good idea?  I mean, even if you're a NRA supporter, NO ONE likes robocalls.  I don't if it's from an organization campaigning for free daily blow jobs from Japanese women dressed as nuns, school girls, and nurses for Virginia Tech mining engineer grads, I'd be against it just because it was a robocall.
 
2013-03-25 11:14:23 PM

novalord2: Giltric: Marcus Aurelius: Propain_az: Just for the record, I turned in my 2 AR-15s, My AR-10, and my two hand guns to the police.  I couldn't live with them anymore.  Too dangerous.

I don't know about the hand guns, but the ARs could jam any time.  Usually when it's inconvenient.

/all guns should be registered and insured and locked up tight

According to the Chief of Police of Milwaukee during Feinsteins hearing on gun control. 90% of the perpetrators of firearm related homicide are felons with prior convictions and 80% of their victims are felons with prior convictions. Both of which are excluded from owning or possessing firearms due to felonies on record.

Do you think they would purchase insurance, lock their firearms up or register them?

The goal of gun control is to turn law abiding citizens like many firearms owners hear on Fark into criminals.

It is nothing more than thought crime due to the potential death that a firearm may create.

So how do you explain the fact that NRA is opposed to closing the gun show loophole and strengthening background checks?


Hey, a violent psychopath's money is as good as anyone else's.
 
2013-03-25 11:14:38 PM

Satanic_Hamster: WHO at the NRA thought this was a good idea?


The NRA is utterly incapable of introspection. It's why they're against background checks and things like that. Also the people in charge are batshiat crazy.
 
2013-03-25 11:14:58 PM

Marcintosh: violentsalvation: James F. Campbell: You know, if liberals actually hated America, they'd be all for the proliferation of handguns.

If "liberals" were actually liberal they wouldn't be trying to shiat on rights they don't like.

typical derp.  Can't hear what's being said for the noises in the head.


I was wondering what to favorite you as since the gun thread earlier today, thank you for so succinctly describing your mental deficiencies. With a rhyme even!
 
2013-03-25 11:16:11 PM

Giltric: By their own admittance they are getting them from straw purchasers who are usually family members, from other people who have stolen them or aquired them through a straw purchase or another way and by stealing them.


Sounds like illegal weapons trafficking to me.  I think the straw buyers should do more time for the bogus purchase than the felon looking to get armed, because they're abusing the public trust--whereas the felon has already lost it.
 
2013-03-25 11:16:26 PM

WhyteRaven74: Satanic_Hamster: WHO at the NRA thought this was a good idea?

The NRA is utterly incapable of introspection. It's why they're against background checks and things like that. Also the people in charge are batshiat crazy.


One group that also seems incapable of introspection?  Lefties, especially gun control supporters.

If the NRA was so out of touch with its members, why aren't they hemorrhaging money?
 
2013-03-25 11:16:48 PM

firefly212: I got a robocall from the NRA a month ago here in CO... the thing is, they want me to give them money to fight against background checks... I actually agree with them that the AWB is stupid and that magazine sizes are generally irrelevant.... but I'm not going to give money to a crazy ass group that thinks people should be able to buy guns with less difficulty than it takes for me to get Claritin D. The realities with respect to gun crime are that handguns account for the VAST majority of gun crimes, they don't have particularly large magazines to start with, and we, as a nation, have worked diligently over the last 30 years to turn mental health cases out onto the streets because conservatives thought people were freeloading by living in inpatient mental health facilities even though they didn't have money. We made it far easier to get guns than to get mental healthcare, and we're farking insane if we expect any other result. That said, you'd have to be one of those mental patients to not see that selling guns without background checks is just nuts... the idea that you could quite literally sell guns out of your trunk in person to person transactions with no paperwork at all... and that it is legal in many places, that should anger the fark out of any responsible gun owner.


As a responsible gun owner, I assure you it does. Background checks FTW.
And having sought treatment for depression was much harder than buying a piece.
The last 4 mass shooters in the news all had red flags soaked in gasoline and lit on fire showing they were dangerous. Hell, the Aurora guys psychiatrist called the cops and said he was dangerous, and they didn't do  damn thing. Maybe she should have said he had a meth lab in his apartment.
 
2013-03-25 11:17:21 PM

Lionel Mandrake: novalord2: Giltric: Marcus Aurelius: Propain_az: Just for the record, I turned in my 2 AR-15s, My AR-10, and my two hand guns to the police.  I couldn't live with them anymore.  Too dangerous.

I don't know about the hand guns, but the ARs could jam any time.  Usually when it's inconvenient.

/all guns should be registered and insured and locked up tight

According to the Chief of Police of Milwaukee during Feinsteins hearing on gun control. 90% of the perpetrators of firearm related homicide are felons with prior convictions and 80% of their victims are felons with prior convictions. Both of which are excluded from owning or possessing firearms due to felonies on record.

Do you think they would purchase insurance, lock their firearms up or register them?

The goal of gun control is to turn law abiding citizens like many firearms owners hear on Fark into criminals.

It is nothing more than thought crime due to the potential death that a firearm may create.

So how do you explain the fact that NRA is opposed to closing the gun show loophole and strengthening background checks?

Hey, a violent psychopath's money is as good as anyone else's.


In some threads you are well spoken and have well thought out ideas. Why do you become a petulant child throwing a tantrum in other threads...like this one?

You don't even make points or counter points. You just reach into your diaper and smear poop all over your own face.
 
2013-03-25 11:17:34 PM

jaytkay: davidphogan: Craptastic: davidphogan: Do you like the PATRIOT Act?

No sir. I do not like it. I didn't like it when Bush signed, and I liked it even less when Obama extended it.

So is one emotional policy reaction better or worse than another? If the NRA's actions are so bad assume you have the same issue with the victims families testifying in favor of gun control?

Emotional responses to a tragedy don't result in good policy no mater which side you agree with.

Both sides are bad so do what the NRA wants.

Thanks for the calm, reasoned advice.


Coming from you I wouldn't expect calm, rational, or anything but a do-nothing knee-jerk response based on "guns scare me!"
 
2013-03-25 11:18:20 PM

Giltric: Define "gun show loophole". I am unfamiliar with the term.


You sound really well-informed

/ Disingenuous asshole is disingenuous
 
2013-03-25 11:18:35 PM

pedrop357: WhyteRaven74: Satanic_Hamster: WHO at the NRA thought this was a good idea?

The NRA is utterly incapable of introspection. It's why they're against background checks and things like that. Also the people in charge are batshiat crazy.

One group that also seems incapable of introspection?  Lefties, especially gun control supporters.

If the NRA was so out of touch with its members, why aren't they hemorrhaging money?


Scare the shiat out of people and the money flows in.  Fear is good for business.
 
2013-03-25 11:19:37 PM

Bonzo_1116: Giltric: By their own admittance they are getting them from straw purchasers who are usually family members, from other people who have stolen them or aquired them through a straw purchase or another way and by stealing them.

Sounds like illegal weapons trafficking to me.  I think the straw buyers should do more time for the bogus purchase than the felon looking to get armed, because they're abusing the public trust--whereas the felon has already lost it.


Yep, and couple that with the lack of interest in prosecuting people who lie on their background check and fail them and you have people who should be in jail free to go out and procure a firearm by other methods.
 
2013-03-25 11:19:52 PM

dave2198: The government bans all kinds of things from appearing on cable TV.


What do they ban on cable?  I'd love the list.
 
2013-03-25 11:20:12 PM
It's sad that the NRA doesn't get it. They think they are defending an "American Institution". In reality, they are ineptly defending a hobby that is declining in popularity (unless you buy the incredibly lame "they are lying to the surveyors" explanation). They are f**king themselves, and gun owners, in the ass. If you are a gun owner, and give the NRA money, you are the textbook example of a "sucker".
It's pitiful - snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I thought we gun owners (sane ones) had this won, with Heller. But the NRA is going to f**k it up. Oh well.
 
2013-03-25 11:20:18 PM

jaytkay: Giltric: Define "gun show loophole". I am unfamiliar with the term.

You sound really well-informed

/ Disingenuous asshole is disingenuous



Can you define it for me?
 
2013-03-25 11:20:43 PM

Giltric: Feinstein


Feinstein? Really?

See... This is why political conversation has gone to shiat. You take a quote from a fringe element and assume that all people on one "side" support it. My only point in this thread is that the NRA is full of a bunch of scared assholes, and that they have no shame. Nobody is trying to 'take your guns', for f*ck's sake.

If your response to gun violence is "Maybe MORE guns is the answer!" then you might be an asshole.
 
2013-03-25 11:21:10 PM
I. R. Rottweiler:
As a responsible gun owner, I assure you it does. Background checks FTW.

Yeah, here's the thing - I'd love to be able to perform a background check before I sold a rifle of mine. As a private face to face seller, not a dealer, I cannot do that. Pretty lame, right?
So lets get some legislation passed to let me do that, which I as a gun owner support! Oh wait, what did the democrats put in there? Its a felony not to do so? Well I don't think that - wait, and they charge me a fee for it? That the AG can arbitrarily set at any level? Wait now....and any transfer without one is a felony, even gifts to my immediate family? Hold up just a second - wait, they define any handling as a transfer? So if my buddy and I go shooting and he brings my rifle case in from the truck, we're both felons? If I go out of town and leave my guns in the safe at home for 7+ days, my wife and I are felons now? (We would have had to transfer them all to my spouse at 50+ bucks a pop before I left, then transfer them back to me when I returned.) Oh, and every transfer is tied to serial numbers and addresses and all so its a backdoor registry?

I'm not feeling so positive about this legislation now.

And having sought treatment for depression was much harder than buying a piece.
The last 4 mass shooters in the news all had red flags soaked in gasoline and lit on fire showing they were dangerous. Hell, the Aurora guys psychiatrist called the cops and said he was dangerous, and they didn't do  damn thing. Maybe she should have said he had a meth lab in his apartment.


Oh, I know. Mental illness and mental health in general is so neglected. Some of these really crazy farks - if they had early intervention they might be fine today, holding down jobs and contributing to society. Instead, dead.
 
2013-03-25 11:21:52 PM

WhyteRaven74: Satanic_Hamster: WHO at the NRA thought this was a good idea?

The NRA is utterly incapable of introspection. It's why they're against background checks and things like that. Also the people in charge are batshiat crazy.


I'm not saying they should have thought about the message (which they should have).  I'm questioning the basic competency of even using robocalls.  I mean, did some guy sit there and was all like, "Robocalls, fark yeah!" and the people in the room were all like, "Right on, bro."
 
2013-03-25 11:22:19 PM

Giltric: Craptastic: Giltric: Craptastic: Giltric: You didn't address the part about turning tragedy into a sales pitch when the gun control side is doing it.

WTF are you talking about? The NRA uses this tragedy to sell more guns, and the anti-gun folks use this tragedy to discourage the access to guns. What am I supposed to address?


So it is a hysterical example when who does it?

I was trying to gauge if you had any principles.

Huh? If you're trying to score some internet-points, you should be more precise. Otherwise, you just look like a drooling knuckle-dragger. What "principles" are you trying to "gauge"?

I almost feel bad discussing this with you. I've already got you to the point where you are angry and flustered and calling people names with almost no effort on my part.


Look at you. You think that you're capable of making me angry. How cute.
 
2013-03-25 11:23:13 PM

Craptastic: Giltric: Feinstein

Feinstein? Really?

See... This is why political conversation has gone to shiat. You take a quote from a fringe element and assume that all people on one "side" support it. My only point in this thread is that the NRA is full of a bunch of scared assholes, and that they have no shame. Nobody is trying to 'take your guns', for f*ck's sake.

If your response to gun violence is "Maybe MORE guns is the answer!" then you might be an asshole.


The police seem to think that more guns is the answer.  So do all the areas adding more school police.

How do you feel about drugs designed to combat overdoses?  Do you rail against them by complaining that "MORE drugs is not the answer"?
 
2013-03-25 11:23:45 PM

Craptastic: Giltric: Feinstein

Feinstein? Really?

See... This is why political conversation has gone to shiat. You take a quote from a fringe element and assume that all people on one "side" support it. My only point in this thread is that the NRA is full of a bunch of scared assholes, and that they have no shame. Nobody is trying to 'take your guns', for f*ck's sake.


Yet she and other talk about it incessantly.
 
2013-03-25 11:24:45 PM

Lionel Mandrake: pedrop357: WhyteRaven74: Satanic_Hamster: WHO at the NRA thought this was a good idea?

The NRA is utterly incapable of introspection. It's why they're against background checks and things like that. Also the people in charge are batshiat crazy.

One group that also seems incapable of introspection?  Lefties, especially gun control supporters.

If the NRA was so out of touch with its members, why aren't they hemorrhaging money?

Scare the shiat out of people and the money flows in.  Fear is good for business.


See also: The entire GOP.
 
2013-03-25 11:25:19 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: davidphogan: So again, do only the victims get a voice?

Someone said it earlier. It's not a matter of whether the NRA can do this, it's a matter of whether they should do this. Criticizing these calls isn't an attempt to stifle free speech, it's just more free speech.


You're the one who decided they're playing the victim card.  They're politicizing the tragedy just as much as the other side.

But both sides are bad, so vote for gun control?
 
2013-03-25 11:26:05 PM
Bayou Otter- Yeah, here's the thing - I'd love to be able to perform a background check before I sold a rifle of mine. As a private face to face seller, not a dealer, I cannot do that. Pretty lame, right?

actually? you can - just contact your local PD and ask - and tack on the minimal charge to your selling price - it just takes some extra time and effort
 
2013-03-25 11:26:42 PM

BayouOtter: Craptastic: Giltric: Feinstein

Feinstein? Really?

See... This is why political conversation has gone to shiat. You take a quote from a fringe element and assume that all people on one "side" support it. My only point in this thread is that the NRA is full of a bunch of scared assholes, and that they have no shame. Nobody is trying to 'take your guns', for f*ck's sake.

Yet she and other talk about it incessantly.


Jesus Herman Christ. Do you think that she and "other" speak for everyone? Are you that dense?
 
2013-03-25 11:27:04 PM

jso2897: It's sad that the NRA doesn't get it. They think they are defending an "American Institution". In reality, they are ineptly defending a hobby that is declining in popularity (unless you buy the incredibly lame "they are lying to the surveyors" explanation). They are f**king themselves, and gun owners, in the ass. If you are a gun owner, and give the NRA money, you are the textbook example of a "sucker".
It's pitiful - snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I thought we gun owners (sane ones) had this won, with Heller. But the NRA is going to f**k it up. Oh well.


I have a co-worker who signed up for the NRA lifetime membership because he thought the mailers and the calls would slow down.  I choked on my coffee.

That's like blood in the water, then you get on the "donor list" for sure because now they know you have money and are willing to give it to them.  farking leeches.  I joined the CRPA instead, they actually have timely info on California regs and upcoming legislation, and they don't herp the message with endless pleas for cash to prevent the USA from sliding into darkest jackbooted tyranny.
 
2013-03-25 11:28:03 PM

Bonzo_1116: I think the straw buyers should do more time for the bogus purchase than the felon looking to get armed, because they're abusing the public trust--whereas the felon has already lost it.


One of the big issues with gun sales like that is that currently there's little risk to it. Sell a gun to a felon who then commits a crime with said gun? Good chance you won't face any consequences.

pedrop357: One group that also seems incapable of introspection?


So what rational basis is there for opposing background checks?
 
2013-03-25 11:28:14 PM

davidphogan: You're the one who decided they're playing the victim card.


Someone else was blaming the liberal media (ha) for reporting on the reaction to the NRA's calls, as if the NRA was the victim. I called them out on it.
 
2013-03-25 11:28:35 PM

Craptastic: Nobody is trying to 'take your guns', for f*ck's sake.


See, you started to make a good point, then completely contradicted yourself.  You just admitted that fringe elements are in fact trying to take away the right to own guns.  Then you claimed nobody is.

Craptastic: See... This is why political conversation has gone to shiat.


Ummm, maybe it's people making points like you tried to.
 
2013-03-25 11:28:51 PM
You could say that the NRA is... under fire ... because of this stunt. YEEEAAAHHHHHHHH!
 
Displayed 50 of 647 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report