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.

(Mother Jones)   Remember the school shooting in 2010 at Hastings Middle School in Minnesota that left six students dead? Me either. But if you do, the National Rifle Association would REALLY like you to corroborate the story they apparently pulled out of their ass   (motherjones.com) divider line 390
    More: Asinine, Hastings Middle School, NRA, Minnesota, school shootings, Columbine High School, Dennis Van Roekel  
•       •       •

16438 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Apr 2013 at 1:11 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-04 03:52:02 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Meanwhile, right now you can just leave it lying on the sofa on your porch.


Or in your bed:

blog.the-backup.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsV50T5uEyw
 
2013-04-04 03:52:16 PM  

najay1: Antimatter: Further discussion on this topic is pointless: the guns rights liberal folks won (on the topics of immigration, alcohol, or drugs).  The occasional violent robbery, massacre, rape or murder is just the price we are going to have to accept.

FTFY.


Ding ding ding ding! Congratulations!  You've just won today's Biggest Idiot Prize! Stand in the middle of a highway in a chicken suit to claim your reward.

What do we have for him Jim?

Well, he's gets to referee the KY wrestling match of Sarah "Momma-Bear" Palin and Michelle "The Straightener" Bachmann!
 
2013-04-04 03:53:48 PM  

greenboy: Giltric: greenboy: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Why don't we start with a gun safe that has a combination that your mentally disturbed son doesn't have access to?


Are you referring to Lanza?  Are there any citations for that? I have not heard one way or another if Lanza pried open or drilled into a safe, if he had a combo to the safe, or if there was a safe at all.....

No citations, but we can deduct a few things from what we know as facts.  His mom was shot while in her bed (assumedly sleeping), so 1)we can deduct that she was not currently cleaning 2 pistols and the AR15 (is that the right weapon?)
2) We might be able to assume that drilling into the safe would be loud enough to wake her if not done in the middle of the night.
3) if it wasn't drilled and the weapons were not left out in the open, then he either had access to a key, or knew the combination.  Either of these should be a no-no to a responsible gun owner that had a mentally unstable child.

Option 2 is the only one that removes the negligence on the mother's part.


No sign of forced entry.
 
2013-04-04 03:54:03 PM  
theawesomer.com

Crap, I thought it was here...there it is...

BINGO!
 
2013-04-04 03:54:09 PM  

Giltric: GameSprocket: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Good thing "slippery slope" isn't a logical fallacy or anything. You seem pretty dedicated to it.

Banning certain firearms because someone might use one in a crime is a slippery slope.....do you have a problem with all slippery slopes or just ones you disagree with?


Limiting risk is not a "slippery slope", it is just limiting risk. The slippery slope argument would be "If we allow AR-15s then we will wind up allowing civilians to own nuclear weapons!!!!". There is no inherent logical fallacy in trying to limit risk. I would say the current discussion is more of a "red herring" than a logical fallacy. I don't think that an assault weapon ban will have much impact on the isolated incidents of mass shootings by the mentally ill. I just don't think it is a bad idea to regulate some weapons a bit more completely apart from the mass shootings.
 
2013-04-04 03:55:30 PM  

Mrtraveler01: hdhale: You are totally and completely discounting over 200 years of American history is no big deal. Gun ownership, and most particularly the gun as a tool of self-defense, is completely ingrained into the culture, more so than even booze. Do you honestly expect people will cheerfully surrender their guns? No. You will have just sent up the 'GO!' flag for every black helicopter type who will work to subvert the government that put it into place. You'll have hundreds of Wacos and Ruby Ridges across the country and as the body count of innocent civilians goes ever higher, the government will naturally be forced to crack down (there went your civil liberties...) and that will create even more rebellion. Only now, instead of semiautos, people will be arming up with selective fire REAL assault weapons...why not? If you are going to face off against Federal commandos, might as well be armed like them, and make no mistake there are any number of arms dealers that will cheerfully flood the black market with cheaply priced or free M-16s, AK-47s, military grade sniper rifles (don't think that Iran or North Korea or even Russia would hesitate to subsidize it? think again), or whatever the rebels want. A significant percentage of the US public will cheer them on and provide them quiet aid and comfort.

I don't think you want that and neither do I. This nation is in danger of blowing apart into sectionalism and eventual civil war.

This sounds like a very reasonable and rational post.


*Cranks up the Charlie Daniels to 11*
 
2013-04-04 03:56:17 PM  
As an illegal gun owner, I'm getting a kick out of these replies.
Since my weapons were purchased on the black market,
without any sort of background check or documented bill of sale,
how will the government ever know I have them?

You're right, they won't.  Feel safer, now?

/This scenario was totally fabricated to make my point
 
2013-04-04 03:59:30 PM  

TechnicolorYawn: As an illegal gun owner, I'm getting a kick out of these replies.
Since my weapons were purchased on the black market,
without any sort of background check or documented bill of sale,
how will the government ever know I have them?

You're right, they won't.  Feel safer, now?

/This scenario was totally fabricated to make my point


You're right. We shouldn't even bother to try.

Freedom is messy right?
 
2013-04-04 03:59:53 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.


You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.
 
2013-04-04 04:00:34 PM  
brakes.  Misspelled
 
2013-04-04 04:01:55 PM  

greenboy: fuhfuhfuh: greenboy: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Why don't we start with a gun safe that has a combination that your mentally disturbed son doesn't have access to?

Problem is, if you're stupid enough to give the combo to your "mentally disturbed son", you might as well have just left the damn safe open. Doesn't mean we need to punish everyone for the crimes of a few.

I can't say that it is really punishing anyone by mandating that weapons be kept in a combination safe. 
//I know that this is in no way enforceable.


Therein lies the problem though, and fuels the fever dreams of conspiracy nuts. Verifying the presence of such a safe, and the proper use of said safe, would require some sort of inspection regimen. About the only use such requirements would have would be to assess blame of access to weapons after an event involving said weapons. In the case of stolen weapons used in crimes, it would just mean that the presence of said security would absolve the gun owner in the case that proof of a compromise of security was present. If the guns are never involved in a crime or criminal event, and you didn't have a visitor to your home decide to tattle on you, then no one would ever know whether or not you owned a safe.
 
2013-04-04 04:01:57 PM  

cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.


So common sense safety measures become the norm over time? color me shocked!
 
2013-04-04 04:01:58 PM  

BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud: bugontherug: Giltric: Or am I supposed to be psychic and know someone has stolen my firearms while I am away?

You're supposed to maximally secure your firearm using the most cost effective means available factoring into your cost-benefit calculation that liability can be imposed without fault. That's the idea of strict liability, and it works.

You can think of it as a less intrusive, more enforceable version of a non-variable duty to inventory your firearms daily. Which is a perfectly reasonable, constitutionally permissible duty the state can impose.

Want to maintain your firearms rights? Keep track of your firearms every day. It really is that simple!

Technology is tiny nowadays.
Why not add GPS transmitters like are in cell phones? Then you can have your gun monitored 24/7.

No possibility of abuse there!

What abuse to you foresee?

Wouldn't that allow guns (and by proxy their owners) in real time?  Also, it could be avoided with a simple anti-static bag.

And?
If you have a cell phone, that can happen now anyway.

Cell phones are used on private networks and are not enumerated rights ;-)


Again, and?

Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?
 
2013-04-04 04:02:00 PM  

cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.


Wait...are you trying to equate the two and say that both are terrible things?
 
2013-04-04 04:02:05 PM  
"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."

"Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed"

Are you with God or with Satan (and his guns)?
 
2013-04-04 04:02:19 PM  

cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.


thumbnails.hulu.com
 
2013-04-04 04:03:26 PM  

Mrtraveler01: cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.

Wait...are you trying to equate the two and say that both are terrible things?


Nope.  Just saying "Who needs more amateur theorists?"
 
2013-04-04 04:04:38 PM  

greenboy: cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.

So common sense safety measures become the norm over time? color me shocked!


Plus the fact that side and knee level airbags are something the auto makers are doing VOLUNTARILY and not due to any government action.

Which means this is different from the slippery slope example that was posted earlier in which it was the government that added on to additional regulations.

Once again, quite a fail being displayed here today.
 
2013-04-04 04:04:40 PM  
GameSprocket:

[thumbnails.hulu.com image 384x288]

I miss that actor being on SNL don't you?
 
2013-04-04 04:05:06 PM  
Mrtraveler01,
Try what?  Finding guns that have NO record of their ownership or even their existence?  Haha...okay.

Find all the registered guns, though, because derp, derp, derp, derp.
 
2013-04-04 04:05:29 PM  

WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud: bugontherug: Giltric: Or am I supposed to be psychic and know someone has stolen my firearms while I am away?

You're supposed to maximally secure your firearm using the most cost effective means available factoring into your cost-benefit calculation that liability can be imposed without fault. That's the idea of strict liability, and it works.

You can think of it as a less intrusive, more enforceable version of a non-variable duty to inventory your firearms daily. Which is a perfectly reasonable, constitutionally permissible duty the state can impose.

Want to maintain your firearms rights? Keep track of your firearms every day. It really is that simple!

Technology is tiny nowadays.
Why not add GPS transmitters like are in cell phones? Then you can have your gun monitored 24/7.

No possibility of abuse there!

What abuse to you foresee?

Wouldn't that allow guns (and by proxy their owners) in real time?  Also, it could be avoided with a simple anti-static bag.

And?
If you have a cell phone, that can happen now anyway.

Cell phones are used on private networks and are not enumerated rights ;-)

Again, and?

Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?


Where in the rights to free speech does it say it cannot be anonymous?
 
2013-04-04 04:05:37 PM  

fuhfuhfuh: greenboy: fuhfuhfuh: greenboy: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Why don't we start with a gun safe that has a combination that your mentally disturbed son doesn't have access to?

Problem is, if you're stupid enough to give the combo to your "mentally disturbed son", you might as well have just left the damn safe open. Doesn't mean we need to punish everyone for the crimes of a few.

I can't say that it is really punishing anyone by mandating that weapons be kept in a combination safe. 
//I know that this is in no way enforceable.

Therein lies the problem though, and fuels the fever dreams of conspiracy nuts. Verifying the presence of such a safe, and the proper use of said safe, would require some sort of inspection regimen. About the only use such requirements would have would be to assess blame of access to weapons after an event involving said weapons. In the case of stolen weapons used in crimes, it would just mean that the presence of said security would absolve the gun owner in the case that proof of a compromise of security was present. If the guns are never involved in a crime or criminal event, and you didn't have a visitor to your home decide to tattle on you, then no one would ever know whether or not you owned a safe.


which is why it can't and never will be a law, BUT it should be one of those things that every responsible gun owner does.

//grew up in a household with guns behind a glass case.  The key was on the top of the case.
 
2013-04-04 04:05:53 PM  

Mrtraveler01: greenboy: cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.

So common sense safety measures become the norm over time? color me shocked!

Plus the fact that side and knee ...


Shh. My benadryl is tapdancing with my apple juice
 
2013-04-04 04:06:00 PM  

Virtue: I find the NRA more credible than anything a gun control advocate has ever said.


Well you have shown how untrustworthy you are, thanks for the tip.
 
2013-04-04 04:06:32 PM  

cwolf20: GameSprocket:

[thumbnails.hulu.com image 384x288]

I miss that actor being on SNL don't you?


Since his career since then (with the possible exception of the first Wayne's World) has been a load of crap... yes, I miss him very much.
 
2013-04-04 04:06:42 PM  

TechnicolorYawn: Mrtraveler01,
Try what?  Finding guns that have NO record of their ownership or even their existence?  Haha...okay.

Find all the registered guns, though, because derp, derp, derp, derp.


So what do you propose we do instead?
 
2013-04-04 04:07:37 PM  

cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.


Are you suggesting that seat belts, anti-lock breaks and airbags have impinged on your personal freedoms while offering no benefit to the human race?
 
2013-04-04 04:09:14 PM  

BgJonson79: WippitGuud:
Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?

Where in the rights to free speech does it say it cannot be anonymous?


"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."

In order to be responsible, you have to know who it is.
 
2013-04-04 04:09:39 PM  

cwolf20: GameSprocket:

[thumbnails.hulu.com image 384x288]

I miss that actor being on SNL don't you?


Yeah. I never really got into anything he did after that. The first "Wayne's World" movie was good, but Myers has a tendency to make one great earnest movie and then follow it up with a sequel that is way too self-aware and self-referential. He seems to make one movie because he has a story to tell and then sells out for the followups.
 
2013-04-04 04:11:53 PM  

lostcat: cwolf20: Keizer_Ghidorah: Giltric: Generic Republican: You also want no obligation to store these weapons in a manner that makes them resistant to theft. In essence, you want zero responsibility for owning a weapon

A safe will be enough at first...then after the first incident it will have to be a safe that is at least one inch thick, then it will have to be a safe that is 2 inches thick....then the safe will have to be made of solid unobtanium with an alarm that notifies the police that it is being broken into, then we will end up back at registries because the goal line keeps being moved further and further  by the people whos ultimate goal is nothing but the total disarmament of people.

Wow, you really are a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

You know. My parents remember when a seatbelt was their arm.  For whoever was in the passenger seat. If it was me, one of them was in the backseat to slam their arm against me.

Then came seatbelts.

Automatic breaks came along at some point.

Somebody wanted an inflatable pillow to protect their heads, so an airbag was put in the steering wheel.

Eventually one was put in the passenger side.

Some cars now have them in the back seat.

Then there were the front airbags a Toyota has.  1 for each side of the windshield.  As I was finishing the paperwork for the 2009 corolla I bought new, they said that in 3 months the same model would have knee level airbags too.

For several years a lot of cars have had pull handles inside the trunk in case someone gets thrown in one.

A tire company is releasing some expensive tires for private use that can take a hell of a lot of damage, retain air after being punctured for quite a bit longer than the ones out there now. Etc etc etc.

Who needs to have conspiracy theories.  Panicked Parental Politicians Nitpicking ensure we don't need the theories for them to become fact.

Are you suggesting that seat belts, anti-lock breaks and airbags have impinged on your personal freedoms while offering n ...


Nope.  I think it's more of a case I don't give a crap today.  I don't own a gun, I don't see myself owning one because it'll probably be taken out of my hands if i need to use it and used on me instead. Simply because I don't see myself killing anyone.

So, since I'm probably safer at home without one if someone breaks in, it's looney times in the looney internet
 
2013-04-04 04:14:44 PM  

WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud:
Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?

Where in the rights to free speech does it say it cannot be anonymous?

"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."

In order to be responsible, you have to know who it is.


Wasn't that done at the time of purchase?
 
2013-04-04 04:16:01 PM  
Mrtraveler01,

The government has already figured it out...monopolize all the ammo.
Unfortunately, it's temporary, and they're only feeding the beast with these kinds of actions.

No matter what they do, people will figure out how to build their own weapons.
 
2013-04-04 04:16:28 PM  

cwolf20: Nope. I think it's more of a case I don't give a crap today. I don't own a gun, I don't see myself owning one because it'll probably be taken out of my hands if i need to use it and used on me instead. Simply because I don't see myself killing anyone.

So, since I'm probably safer at home without one if someone breaks in, it's looney times in the looney internet


I have a couple of guns, but I also have two boys who take after me in their ability to get into things. I am WAY more concerned with making sure my kids don't get their mitts on those guns that I am about protecting myself from home invasion.
 
2013-04-04 04:18:18 PM  

GameSprocket: cwolf20: Nope. I think it's more of a case I don't give a crap today. I don't own a gun, I don't see myself owning one because it'll probably be taken out of my hands if i need to use it and used on me instead. Simply because I don't see myself killing anyone.

So, since I'm probably safer at home without one if someone breaks in, it's looney times in the looney internet

I have a couple of guns, but I also have two boys who take after me in their ability to get into things. I am WAY more concerned with making sure my kids don't get their mitts on those guns that I am about protecting myself from home invasion.


No kids here, or marriage for that matter.  Haven't tied the knot with anyone.
 
2013-04-04 04:20:09 PM  

BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud:
Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?

Where in the rights to free speech does it say it cannot be anonymous?

"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."

In order to be responsible, you have to know who it is.

Wasn't that done at the time of purchase?


I don't get your arguement, especially why all the stuff about seatbelts/airbags. Sorry.
 
2013-04-04 04:21:21 PM  
Wow, it's like Dan Rather is consulting for the NRA.

//lude
 
2013-04-04 04:22:09 PM  
Good Lord the fear mongering and appeals to emotion are thick in these threads.
 
2013-04-04 04:23:02 PM  

lostcat: BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud:
Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?

Where in the rights to free speech does it say it cannot be anonymous?

"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."

In order to be responsible, you have to know who it is.

Wasn't that done at the time of purchase?

I don't get your arguement, especially why all the stuff about seatbelts/airbags. Sorry.


Sorry...My response was meant for the post above yours, BgJonson79.
 
2013-04-04 04:23:05 PM  

BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud:
Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?

Where in the rights to free speech does it say it cannot be anonymous?

"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."

In order to be responsible, you have to know who it is.

Wasn't that done at the time of purchase?


You tell me, I don't own a gun.
But I was under the assumption that gun owners were against additional registration. I know here in Canada they got rid of the "Long Gun Registration" that was put in a while ago.
 
2013-04-04 04:23:59 PM  

BigNumber12: Good Lord the fear mongering and appeals to emotion are thick in these threads.


Use the insanity.

Let it guide your drinking.

The insanity will be with you, always
 
2013-04-04 04:24:29 PM  

BigNumber12: Good Lord the fear mongering and appeals to emotion are thick in these threads.


People getting murdered tends to bring out fear and emotion. Stupid human nature.
 
2013-04-04 04:25:26 PM  

cwolf20: BigNumber12: Good Lord the fear mongering and appeals to emotion are thick in these threads.

Use the insanity.

Let it guide your drinking.

The insanity will be with you, always



My drinking doesn't need any outside help, believe me.
 
2013-04-04 04:27:51 PM  

lostcat: lostcat: BgJonson79: WippitGuud: BgJonson79: WippitGuud:
Where in the rights to own a gun does it say it has to be untraceable?

Where in the rights to free speech does it say it cannot be anonymous?

"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."

In order to be responsible, you have to know who it is.

Wasn't that done at the time of purchase?

I don't get your arguement, especially why all the stuff about seatbelts/airbags. Sorry.

Sorry...My response was meant for the post above yours, BgJonson79.


NP!
 
2013-04-04 04:28:23 PM  

lostcat: BigNumber12: Good Lord the fear mongering and appeals to emotion are thick in these threads.

People getting murdered tends to bring out fear and emotion. Stupid human nature.



I noticed that on 9/11. Good thing we let our collective emotion drive widespread calls for exciting new legislation that the Government is oh-so-fond of protecting and expanding!
 
2013-04-04 04:35:00 PM  
Gun nuts have already lost the war...

www.bartcop.com

The only way their guns can protect them now is if they put it in their mouth and pull the trigger.
 
2013-04-04 04:35:28 PM  
Mrtraveler01: ...was subdued by school authorities before any shots broke out"

 How is this possible?  Everyone knows that if you have a gun, the other guy is just going to take it from you and use it on you.
 
2013-04-04 04:36:25 PM  

GameSprocket: Giblet: Bravo wants bad people to stop being bad, but Bravo, likely a liberal, has no problem solving skills and lacks the vocabulary to express Bravo's desires. So, Bravo cites things that Bravo has been told bad people use when they do bad things: guns, knives, posturing, and sluts. Bravo wants those gone. When they're gone, bad people have no alternative; they must now be good people.

Please, continue to dazzle us with your vast critical thinking skills.


Is that an example of your critical thinking?

Maybe you're just lazy.
 
2013-04-04 04:40:58 PM  

factoryconnection: royone: Those bastards are trying to lie us into secure windows in our schools!

factoryconnection: Now, when I point that out, people in the target audience of the writer squeal because I'm stuck on "small details" and whatnot

What was I saying earlier?  So no matter how wrong, mis-cited, or even fabricated their evidence is, they can use it to bolster the point that you already agreed with.  To you, there is nothing that could shake their credibility.

This is pretty much exactly what I was talking about.


I didn't say anything about their credibility. Nothing can shake your belief that everybody's in your echo chamber or they're the filthy enemy.
 
2013-04-04 04:42:38 PM  

neversubmit: fuhfuhfuh: Both sides of the current gun debate seem to enjoy resorting to appeals to emotion, slippery slopes and outright fabrications to try to defend their positions. Doesn't make either side right, or make either side look like they are anything but knee-jerk reactionaries.

Which side has a body count?


The pro-abortion side.
 
2013-04-04 04:44:17 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: neversubmit: fuhfuhfuh: Both sides of the current gun debate seem to enjoy resorting to appeals to emotion, slippery slopes and outright fabrications to try to defend their positions. Doesn't make either side right, or make either side look like they are anything but knee-jerk reactionaries.

Which side has a body count?

The pro-abortion side.


A blob of cells is not a body.
 
Displayed 50 of 390 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report