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.

(Daily Mail)   Jay Mohr calls for repeal of Second Amendment on Twitter. Tag is for Adam Baldwin's response   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 418
    More: Stupid, Jay Mohr, second amendment, Boston Marathon, 2nd amendment, Adam Baldwin, Twitter, Boston, Fox Sports Radio  
•       •       •

20397 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 17 Apr 2013 at 8:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-17 08:39:47 PM

douchebag/hater: #394 in an on-going list of stupid people saying stupid things.

Mohr  isn't much of a comedian and less of an actor. The fact that his asinine comment makes the news goes to show how low we've sunk as a culture.


Nice handle
 
2013-04-17 08:39:52 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If someone shot my wife in the face with a 12 gauge shotgun, I'd want to repeal the 2nd amendment too.


Sadly, she did that to herself.

/Apparently, it doesn't get better.
 
2013-04-17 08:40:01 PM

The Name: hulk hogan meat shoes: We can't even agree on more background checks.

We can't agree on evolution vs. creationism either, but that doesn't mean the evolution people aren't indisputably right.


I don't think evolution is an apt analogy at all.
 
2013-04-17 08:40:50 PM

sheep snorter: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. and once America has an Army, the second amendment shall be abolished.


/Unless you are wetting your pants thinking the big black man is gonna come to your home in his big black SUV and break your window and come on in and take it from you, well you might be paranoid.
//Sarcasm. How does it work.


That's some nice racism you got going on there sheep.
 
2013-04-17 08:41:35 PM
i am waiting for one of these hollywood libs to start asking the studios to voluntarily stop showing gun violence in the movies as a way to influence our gun culture (remember smoking used to be cool too and being gay used to be negatively depicted too).
 
2013-04-17 08:41:51 PM

GoldSpider: Obvious false flag.  No true liberal believes in the amendment process.


Whereas conservatives believe the amendment process is a way to ensure gays can't get married.
 
2013-04-17 08:42:33 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: i am waiting for one of these hollywood libs to start asking the studios to voluntarily stop showing gun violence in the movies as a way to influence our gun culture (remember smoking used to be cool too and being gay used to be negatively depicted too).


Smoking is still cool. I know I look bad ass with a cigarette.
 
2013-04-17 08:43:24 PM

The Name: It should be repealed.  Every other first-world country seems to get along just fine without any equivalent clause in its constitution.  The only purpose the second amendment serves is to rhetorically block any and all reasonable gun control legislation, even at the local level.


To provide fair consideration: it also blocks unreasonable firearm regulation.
 
2013-04-17 08:43:26 PM

YodaBlues: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If someone shot my wife in the face with a 12 gauge shotgun, I'd want to repeal the 2nd amendment too.

Sadly, she did that to herself.

/Apparently, it doesn't get better.


This country doesnt need new laws.  It needs an intervention :(
 
2013-04-17 08:43:32 PM

AdolfOliverPanties:  

I hope Wayne LaPierre is killed with a gun.  Not soon; I hope he lives a normal lifespan.  But I hope that is the way his life ends; violently, with him shiatting himself in fear.


And yet you think of yourself as 'tolerant'.

Ain't that sumptin'?
 
2013-04-17 08:43:53 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: i am waiting for one of these hollywood libs to start asking the studios to voluntarily stop showing gun violence in the movies as a way to influence our gun culture (remember smoking used to be cool too and being gay used to be negatively depicted too).


Your knee jerk is showing.

Looks like you missed the other "hollywood lib" in the "story" who said Mohr was stupid.
 
2013-04-17 08:44:00 PM

Mrbogey: AdolfOliverPanties: I hope Wayne LaPierre is killed with a gun. Not soon; I hope he lives a normal lifespan. But I hope that is the way his life ends; violently, with him shiatting himself in fear.

Stay classy.


If LaPierre ever shows the slightest bit of class or compassion towards the victims of gun violence, I'll consider changing my mind.
 
2013-04-17 08:44:06 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: i am waiting for one of these hollywood libs to start asking the studios to voluntarily stop showing gun violence in the movies as a way to influence our gun culture (remember smoking used to be cool too and being gay used to be negatively depicted too).


Sigourney Weaver successfully had all guns removed from the Alien 3 script because she was so against them. Otherwise she wouldn't have done the movie, and the studio was willing to do that because she was such a huge draw for the franchise.

We all know how well that turned out.
 
2013-04-17 08:44:57 PM
No love for "Action"? I bought the DVD and watched the shows that were to appear if it hadn't been cancelled.

One of the funniest satirical shows ever - and it was on broadcast TV, no less. It was painfully pointed. It went up to the line, and rushed right on past. Repeatedly. It was so wrong.

C'mon, FARK - it had your R. Lee Ermey as a freakin' ART DIRECTOR.

www.ifc.com
 
2013-04-17 08:45:30 PM
As the winner of his Twitter Hat Trick contest today, I'm really getting a kick
 
2013-04-17 08:45:33 PM

jedihirsch: Actually I think the tag should be for Mohr. Baldwin is the correct one and rational one here


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-04-17 08:45:37 PM
shut up, Jay. No one cares.
 
2013-04-17 08:45:46 PM
It's at least a more honest approach than pretending you can weasel and back-door all kinds of restrictions and pre-qualifications through legislation.
 
2013-04-17 08:45:55 PM

Dimensio: The Name: It should be repealed.  Every other first-world country seems to get along just fine without any equivalent clause in its constitution.  The only purpose the second amendment serves is to rhetorically block any and all reasonable gun control legislation, even at the local level.

To provide fair consideration: it also blocks unreasonable firearm regulation.


Yeah, expanding background checks is not unreasonable firearm regulation.
 
2013-04-17 08:46:05 PM

douchebag/hater: AdolfOliverPanties:  

I hope Wayne LaPierre is killed with a gun.  Not soon; I hope he lives a normal lifespan.  But I hope that is the way his life ends; violently, with him shiatting himself in fear.

And yet you think of yourself as 'tolerant'.

Ain't that sumptin'?


Where did I claim to be tolerant, douchebag?
 
2013-04-17 08:46:26 PM
So are only guns now considered "arms"?

Wow the NRA has done a good job brain washing people.
 
2013-04-17 08:47:27 PM
REPEAL AND REPLACE!!1,!!
 
2013-04-17 08:47:45 PM

USP .45: sheep snorter: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. and once America has an Army, the second amendment shall be abolished.

Centralized authority and a government monopoly on force. Let me guess, you claim to be a "liberal" right? You're doing it wrong.


I like how the Conservative mantra seems to be:
"Worries about goverment authority and monopoly on force" yet also "continually votes for the guys that insists that a huge chunk of our GDP is spent on the governement controlled military"
 
2013-04-17 08:48:35 PM

Corvus: So are only guns now considered "arms"?

Wow the NRA has done a good job brain washing people.


Wait...it's legal to own high explosives?!
 
2013-04-17 08:48:59 PM

skullkrusher: shut up, Jay. No one cares.


Now THAT is funny.
 
2013-04-17 08:50:41 PM
Honestly, I'm a pretty libby lib, and I thought Mohr had the dumbest part of that exchange.

Jay Mohr, you're not helping.
 
2013-04-17 08:51:57 PM

The Name: Dimensio: The Name: It should be repealed.  Every other first-world country seems to get along just fine without any equivalent clause in its constitution.  The only purpose the second amendment serves is to rhetorically block any and all reasonable gun control legislation, even at the local level.

To provide fair consideration: it also blocks unreasonable firearm regulation.

Yeah, expanding background checks is not unreasonable firearm regulation.


You are mistaken; expanding background checks would not be unreasonable.
 
2013-04-17 08:52:06 PM
So two guys who no one gives two shiats about flame each other on twitter this is news? And in the politics tab?
 
2013-04-17 08:53:04 PM

Corvus: So are only guns now considered "arms"?

Wow the NRA has done a good job brain washing people.


I've often wondered that very thing.  What exactly does "Arms" mean?  The militia is necessary for a free state, but free from what?  Free from the threat of foreign governments?  Free from the threat of its own?  Well, shouldn't the "Arms" we're permitted to carry be in scope sufficient to match a challenge by one and/or the other?  What exactly is the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment and how does it relate to the current state of affairs?
 
2013-04-17 08:54:28 PM

Tomahawk513: Corvus: So are only guns now considered "arms"?

Wow the NRA has done a good job brain washing people.

I've often wondered that very thing.  What exactly does "Arms" mean?  The militia is necessary for a free state, but free from what?  Free from the threat of foreign governments?  Free from the threat of its own?  Well, shouldn't the "Arms" we're permitted to carry be in scope sufficient to match a challenge by one and/or the other?  What exactly is the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment and how does it relate to the current state of affairs? And where in the hell was I?


FTFY
 
2013-04-17 08:56:46 PM
Jay Mohr, who has defended violent movies in the guise of at least one on-screen character

Which matters because why again?   It's like saying Anthony Hopkins can't denounce cannibalism because he played Hannibal Lecter.

I have no idea who Jay Mohr is, think what he said was dumb, but Daily Fail gets the stupid tag for even finding this relevant.
 
2013-04-17 08:57:22 PM

Tomahawk513: Corvus: So are only guns now considered "arms"?

Wow the NRA has done a good job brain washing people.

I've often wondered that very thing.  What exactly does "Arms" mean?  The militia is necessary for a free state, but free from what?  Free from the threat of foreign governments?  Free from the threat of its own?  Well, shouldn't the "Arms" we're permitted to carry be in scope sufficient to match a challenge by one and/or the other?  What exactly is the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment and how does it relate to the current state of affairs?


If only that hadn't been discussed about 500 times since December right here on Fark and a million times elsewhere on the 'net...
 
2013-04-17 08:57:47 PM
I love that he's called a Hollywood has-been.
 
2013-04-17 08:59:01 PM

Tomahawk513: I've often wondered that very thing. What exactly does "Arms" mean? The militia is necessary for a free state, but free from what? Free from the threat of foreign governments? Free from the threat of its own? Well, shouldn't the "Arms" we're permitted to carry be in scope sufficient to match a challenge by one and/or the other? What exactly is the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment and how does it relate to the current state of affairs?


Depends on who is interpreting it.  I see it as citizens can take up arms to defend the country against an outside enemy.  This is in place of a standing army.  It says nothing about self-defense and really should be ineffective now that we have standing military forces.

SCOTUS didn't see it that way.
 
2013-04-17 09:00:09 PM
The 2nd Amendment might seem farking retarded now that the government and its citizens aren't evenly matched with muskets anymore but people still have their delusions that if the gov't gets too much out of control, we'll take take 'em out. And I have a few guns myself and repealing an entire amendment isn't going to do anything (except the one about booze).
 
2013-04-17 09:01:15 PM
Listen, I know liberals love to harp on about "background checks" and "waiting periods" and stuff when it comes to gun control. It lets them feel tough without doing something that isn't effective, and unfortunately it's going to have the side effect of losing seats in the midwest and southeast. In Iowa, you can get elected championing some pretty liberal stuff, but to touch the guns is to touch the third rail in most of the midwest.

There would have to be a very, VERY consistent messaging campaign to try and differentiate the guns to be banned from Grandpa's pheasant hunting 20 ga. shotgun in order to even attempt it. And the side that needs it didn't have the cohesion to message the Affordable Care Act effectively, and I don't think they can do it here.

Mind you, I'm a red-stater in favor of the background checks. Maybe even a waiting period for tactical equipment.
 
2013-04-17 09:03:24 PM
Also, what makes his love less valid in your eyes than two men or two women who are in love?

www.fireflywiki.net
"I call her Vera."
 
2013-04-17 09:03:34 PM

jedihirsch: JAYNE COBB IS RIGHT.

How dare you question him

[images4.wikia.nocookie.net image 400x542]

Actually I think the tag should be for Mohr. Baldwin is the correct one and rational one here


Woosh!

I think you might want to take a second look at the tag, then Baldwin's response.  Repeat that process until you get it.
 
2013-04-17 09:03:52 PM

snowshovel: I like how the Conservative mantra seems to be:
"Worries about goverment authority and monopoly on force" yet also "continually votes for the guys that insists that a huge chunk of our GDP is spent on the governement controlled military"


Tell me more about how the framers of our government didn't design it to avoid too much centralized authority and a monopoly on force. I'd love to hear more about how we've been doing it all wrong this whole time.
 
2013-04-17 09:04:16 PM

BarrRepublican: Listen, I know liberals love to harp on about "background checks" and "waiting periods" and stuff when it comes to gun control. It lets them feel tough without doing something that isn't effective, and unfortunately it's going to have the side effect of losing seats in the midwest and southeast. In Iowa, you can get elected championing some pretty liberal stuff, but to touch the guns is to touch the third rail in most of the midwest.

There would have to be a very, VERY consistent messaging campaign to try and differentiate the guns to be banned from Grandpa's pheasant hunting 20 ga. shotgun in order to even attempt it. And the side that needs it didn't have the cohesion to message the Affordable Care Act effectively, and I don't think they can do it here.

Mind you, I'm a red-stater in favor of the background checks. Maybe even a waiting period for tactical equipment.


If it's not effective, why are you in favor of it?  Because you want to feel tough?
 
2013-04-17 09:05:18 PM

Mugato: The 2nd Amendment might seem farking retarded now that the government and its citizens aren't evenly matched with muskets anymore but people still have their delusions that if the gov't gets too much out of control, we'll take take 'em out. And I have a few guns myself and repealing an entire amendment isn't going to do anything (except the one about booze).


Hint: when you have to resort to violent revolution, you're not going to follow the laws of the government you're trying to bring down in the first place.
 
2013-04-17 09:05:23 PM

BarrRepublican: Maybe even a waiting period for tactical equipment.


Wow, you sure you're not going a bit over the deep end with all that liberal nanny-statism there?

Mugato: And I have a few guns myself and repealing an entire amendment isn't going to do anything (except the one about booze).


Actually, you're right.  Repealing the amendment wouldn't do anything, except give states the power to make their own gun laws.  Repealing the second amendment != an automatic national gun ban.
 
2013-04-17 09:07:04 PM

Lionel Mandrake: If it's not effective, why are you in favor of it?  Because you want to feel tough?


He just wanted to throw out the word "liberal" for any reason at all.
 
2013-04-17 09:07:06 PM

mongbiohazard: tenpoundsofcheese: i am waiting for one of these hollywood libs to start asking the studios to voluntarily stop showing gun violence in the movies as a way to influence our gun culture (remember smoking used to be cool too and being gay used to be negatively depicted too).

Your knee jerk is showing.

Looks like you missed the other "hollywood lib" in the "story" who said Mohr was stupid.


Haha! Adam Baldwin is as far away from a Hollywood lib as you can get.
 
2013-04-17 09:07:20 PM

Lionel Mandrake: BarrRepublican: Listen, I know liberals love to harp on about "background checks" and "waiting periods" and stuff when it comes to gun control. It lets them feel tough without doing something that isn't effective, and unfortunately it's going to have the side effect of losing seats in the midwest and southeast. In Iowa, you can get elected championing some pretty liberal stuff, but to touch the guns is to touch the third rail in most of the midwest.

There would have to be a very, VERY consistent messaging campaign to try and differentiate the guns to be banned from Grandpa's pheasant hunting 20 ga. shotgun in order to even attempt it. And the side that needs it didn't have the cohesion to message the Affordable Care Act effectively, and I don't think they can do it here.

Mind you, I'm a red-stater in favor of the background checks. Maybe even a waiting period for tactical equipment.

If it's not effective, why are you in favor of it?  Because you want to feel tough?


Sorry, ever have that moment where you think one thing but write something completely different?

Replace the stuff in the top line with "pistol grips" and "7 round magazines."

/It was a long day at work.
 
2013-04-17 09:09:14 PM

Mugato: Lionel Mandrake: If it's not effective, why are you in favor of it?  Because you want to feel tough?

He just wanted to throw out the word "liberal" for any reason at all.


Perhaps I was secretly outing myself AS a liberal?
 
x23
2013-04-17 09:10:16 PM

orclover: Jay Mohr Who?

Adam Baldwin?  His last name is baldwin?  He's one of the baldwin hive?  No shiat?


yes. because if you share a surname you are automatically related. jesse jackson and andrew jackson and michael jackson and victoria jackson are all related.
 
2013-04-17 09:10:21 PM

scottydoesntknow: tenpoundsofcheese: i am waiting for one of these hollywood libs to start asking the studios to voluntarily stop showing gun violence in the movies as a way to influence our gun culture (remember smoking used to be cool too and being gay used to be negatively depicted too).

Sigourney Weaver successfully had all guns removed from the Alien 3 script because she was so against them. Otherwise she wouldn't have done the movie, and the studio was willing to do that because she was such a huge draw for the franchise.

We all know how well that turned out.


I don't think that movie would have been helped by guns
A better plot and dialog would have done a lot more.
"filming was also plagued by incessant creative interference from studio executives, who overruled many of Fincher's decisions and dictated a large part of production "

But still, it earned over $100M and was a financial success (if you believe wikipedia)
 
2013-04-17 09:10:48 PM

MrEricSir: Hint: when you have to resort to violent revolution, you're not going to follow the laws of the government you're trying to bring down in the first place.


Yeah. No one's ever going to resort to violent revolution but the point is that those who think they might someday need to, want to prepare while guns are still legal.

But no one's going to hold a violent revolution. They just jerk off about it a lot.
 
2013-04-17 09:11:36 PM

x23: orclover: Jay Mohr Who?

Adam Baldwin?  His last name is baldwin?  He's one of the baldwin hive?  No shiat?

yes. because if you share a surname you are automatically related. jesse jackson and andrew jackson and michael jackson and victoria jackson are all related.


What you assert is not possible.

Jessie Jackson and Michael Jackson are not of the same race.
 
Displayed 50 of 418 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report