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.

(WSMV Nashville)   Senator Campfield posted a photo that has been circulating on many gun rights websites, showing what is titled as an "assault pressure cooker" and includes labels such as "tactical pistol grip" and "can cook for hours without reloading"   (wsmv.com) divider line 270
    More: Dumbass, Campfield, Channel 4 News, assault pressure cooker, Sandy Hook Elementary School, senator  
•       •       •

3703 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Apr 2013 at 10:11 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-23 10:34:31 AM

thurstonxhowell: TerminalEchoes: thurstonxhowell: TerminalEchoes: vpb: Gun nuts take that "we can't have gun control because other things kill people too" argument seriously.
I don't think it's trolling.

During the State of the Union speech back in January, didn't President Obama say "if we can do anything to protect just one child, shouldn't we do it?" Sure. A child was killed by a pressure cooker. Regulate! It's not trolling, it's using Obama's manipulative tactics against him.

Run with that. Seriously, keep repeating it. Regulating guns in response to gun violence is the exact same thing as regulating pressure cookers in response to the Boston bombings. Always say that. People will respect you.

According to Obama's speech, yes it's the same thing. Of course it's stupid. I won't debate that.

Repeat my last post, but insert "Obama said that" right before "regulating guns in response". This is an idea that must spread. It is clearly a well-thought out point. You might get Obama impeached over this.


See, now you're just putting words in my mouth. My point was that his knee jerk Appeal to Emotion (or For the Children) speech was nothing but rhetoric and not clearly thought out. No one wants to seriously regulate pressure cookers. People are just pointing out that--according to Obama's exact words--anything that has ever killed a child should be regulated or banned.
 
2013-04-23 10:34:37 AM

TerminalEchoes: During the State of the Union speech back in January, didn't President Obama say "if we can do anything to protect just one child, shouldn't we do it?" Sure. A child was killed by a pressure cooker. Regulate! It's not trolling, it's using Obama's manipulative tactics against him.



Yes, please shout from the rooftops that regulating pressure cookers would be as effective as regulating the sale of guns. I'm sure your arguments would not at all be considered completely inane.
 
2013-04-23 10:34:54 AM

Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Is the senator making a toung in cheeck critique of gun laws, that they do not address what makes the gun dangerous? Perhaps we should do what he wants and make bullets illegal instead.

Pointing out that a position is intensly stupid in addition to being an infringement of fundamental rights is not an endorsement of a less intensely stupid form of the same infringement.

I'm just taking it to its logical conclusion.

Except you aren't. I just pointed out the critical flaw in your reasoning. Stupidity was never the sole objection.


Sure I am. He's mocking the AWB because it doesn't do anything. So fair enough, let's implement legislation that does, because clearly that is what he wants, or else why mock the legislation? What else could he want? He wouldn't be engaging in any intellectual dishonesty at all would he? Because I wouldn't expect that from an esteemed member of our legislative body, nosiree.
 
2013-04-23 10:35:11 AM
Thanks for the ammo, Senator.
 
2013-04-23 10:35:21 AM

optimistic_cynic: markfara: Well, that sure shoots the "guns are the only way to kill people" argument -- you know, the one that the gun-control advocates base their entire argument on -- right in the ass.

What does it do for the argument that guns are only designed for killing? Because that's normally the one used, not the one you pulled out of your ass.


Sarcasm. How does it work?
 
2013-04-23 10:36:20 AM

markfara: optimistic_cynic: markfara: Well, that sure shoots the "guns are the only way to kill people" argument -- you know, the one that the gun-control advocates base their entire argument on -- right in the ass.

What does it do for the argument that guns are only designed for killing? Because that's normally the one used, not the one you pulled out of your ass.

Sarcasm. How does it work?


Not well in the written medium...
 
2013-04-23 10:36:31 AM

markfara: optimistic_cynic: markfara: Well, that sure shoots the "guns are the only way to kill people" argument -- you know, the one that the gun-control advocates base their entire argument on -- right in the ass.

What does it do for the argument that guns are only designed for killing? Because that's normally the one used, not the one you pulled out of your ass.

Sarcasm. How does it work?


Dude you trolled everyone with that!  Congratulations, 10/10!
 
2013-04-23 10:36:32 AM
In other troll-tastic news, I had this sent to me this morning.
http://lewrockwell.com/poindexter/poindexter11.1.html

Farkin Christ, man
 
2013-04-23 10:37:24 AM

vpb: Gun nuts take that "we can't have gun control because other things kill people too" argument seriously.
I don't think it's trolling.


Gun ban advocates claim that pistol grips and collapsing stocks enhance the lethality of a rifle. I know that it is not trolling; they really are that stupid.
 
2013-04-23 10:37:47 AM
 
2013-04-23 10:38:01 AM

jehovahs witness protection: Dayum...you lefties are thin skinned.
Go home and play with your dolls, little girls.



Says the guy that complains because Michelle appeared on the Oscars.
 
2013-04-23 10:39:03 AM

TerminalEchoes: People are just pointing out that--according to Obama's exact words--anything that has ever killed a child should be regulated or banned.


You're doing a fine job here! Somehow I doubt the pay's very good, though.
 
2013-04-23 10:40:02 AM

Wellon Dowd: My first reaction is that it is illegal to manufacture, possess, or use a bomb. Further we highly regulate the operation of automobiles and most states require people who do so to be insured. So why the pro-gun folks are trying to draw parallels between them is beyond me.


I think you're over-analyzing the very simple point of the graphic: "blame".
 
2013-04-23 10:40:05 AM

optimistic_cynic: True but even in competition the object is do destroy the object you're shooting at whether it be a paper target or clay pigeons, it is still a tool for destruction. I would say the same for for archery as well.

/likes guns but does support stronger background checks


By that logic, boiling things in pressurized oil isn't exactly good for them, or constructive...
 
2013-04-23 10:40:06 AM
The office idiot at my work was making the jokes as soon as it was revealed that pressure cookers were used. Asshole.
 
2013-04-23 10:40:29 AM

TerminalEchoes: vpb: Gun nuts take that "we can't have gun control because other things kill people too" argument seriously.
I don't think it's trolling.

During the State of the Union speech back in January, didn't President Obama say "if we can do anything to protect just one child, shouldn't we do it?" Sure. A child was killed by a pressure cooker. Regulate! It's not trolling, it's using Obama's manipulative tactics against him.


Actually, he didn't say that. So, your argument is null and void. Try not to use quotes for something you're not quoting. And try not to make things up.
 
2013-04-23 10:40:29 AM

Wellon Dowd: So why the pro-gun folks are trying to draw parallels between them is beyond me.


It's an attempt to change the argument, because they're not sure they can "win" the current one. It's a superficial misdirection that will work on those who don't actually think about it.

With the 'tactical latch' and 'tactical pistol grip', I'd almost think the Senator was parodying the gun nut side of things who add the word "Tactical" to everything as if that makes it better. But I get the feeling he's actually entirely serious, and that's sad.
 
2013-04-23 10:41:05 AM

TerminalEchoes: thurstonxhowell: TerminalEchoes: thurstonxhowell: TerminalEchoes: vpb: Gun nuts take that "we can't have gun control because other things kill people too" argument seriously.
I don't think it's trolling.

During the State of the Union speech back in January, didn't President Obama say "if we can do anything to protect just one child, shouldn't we do it?" Sure. A child was killed by a pressure cooker. Regulate! It's not trolling, it's using Obama's manipulative tactics against him.

Run with that. Seriously, keep repeating it. Regulating guns in response to gun violence is the exact same thing as regulating pressure cookers in response to the Boston bombings. Always say that. People will respect you.

According to Obama's speech, yes it's the same thing. Of course it's stupid. I won't debate that.

Repeat my last post, but insert "Obama said that" right before "regulating guns in response". This is an idea that must spread. It is clearly a well-thought out point. You might get Obama impeached over this.

See, now you're just putting words in my mouth. My point was that his knee jerk Appeal to Emotion (or For the Children) speech was nothing but rhetoric and not clearly thought out. No one wants to seriously regulate pressure cookers. People are just pointing out that--according to Obama's exact words--anything that has ever killed a child should be regulated or banned.



I've bolded the place where your strawman falls apart.
 
2013-04-23 10:41:33 AM

TerminalEchoes: thurstonxhowell: TerminalEchoes: thurstonxhowell: TerminalEchoes: vpb: Gun nuts take that "we can't have gun control because other things kill people too" argument seriously.
I don't think it's trolling.

During the State of the Union speech back in January, didn't President Obama say "if we can do anything to protect just one child, shouldn't we do it?" Sure. A child was killed by a pressure cooker. Regulate! It's not trolling, it's using Obama's manipulative tactics against him.

Run with that. Seriously, keep repeating it. Regulating guns in response to gun violence is the exact same thing as regulating pressure cookers in response to the Boston bombings. Always say that. People will respect you.

According to Obama's speech, yes it's the same thing. Of course it's stupid. I won't debate that.

Repeat my last post, but insert "Obama said that" right before "regulating guns in response". This is an idea that must spread. It is clearly a well-thought out point. You might get Obama impeached over this.

See, now you're just putting words in my mouth. My point was that his knee jerk Appeal to Emotion (or For the Children) speech was nothing but rhetoric and not clearly thought out. No one wants to seriously regulate pressure cookers. People are just pointing out that--according to Obama's exact words--anything that has ever killed a child should be regulated or banned.


OK, fair enough. "Obama said that" was obviously putting words in your mouth when what you meant to say was "according to Obama's exact words". I apologize for completely misstating your idea. I don't know how I could have gotten it so, so wrong.
 
2013-04-23 10:42:01 AM
this shiat is just not funny, you cawk
 
2013-04-23 10:42:04 AM

star_topology: In other troll-tastic news, I had this sent to me this morning.
http://lewrockwell.com/poindexter/poindexter11.1.html

Farkin Christ, man


Fascist pig delivering groceries to the enslaved.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-04-23 10:42:20 AM

Dimensio: Gun ban advocates claim that pistol grips and collapsing stocks enhance the lethality of a rifle. I know that it is not trolling; they really are that stupid.


Gun Ban Advocate Primary Sources of Knowledge on Firearms: Movies, CSI, Dianne Feinstein, the guy behind 7/11 who robs them three times a week
 
2013-04-23 10:45:43 AM
Ugh.  To all the gun nuts out there:  "THIS shiat IS GETTING REALLY OLD.  PLEASE STOP FILLING UP MY FACEBOOK NEWSFEED WITH YOUR MORONIC ARGUMENTS."

Jesus.  If you were consistent at all, you would say that it is your god-given right to make pressure cooker bombs because they're necessary to defend against a tyrannical government. And, you would be arguing to repeal the laws making the manufacture and possession of IEDs illegal.   After all, "the bomb didn't kill those people, a crazy nutjob did!  Don't blame the innocent bomb!"

On wait.  Making that argument would make you sound even more crazy.  I guess you gotta draw the line somewhere.  Good thing your favorite hobby doesn't involve stockpiling pressure cooker bombs, or you'd be going nuts right now.
 
2013-04-23 10:45:50 AM

TerminalEchoes: according to Obama's exact words


Just reminding everyone that you're a liar. You know people can use the internet to look things up, right?
 
2013-04-23 10:45:51 AM
Substitute a word or two.

Gun Pressure cooker control advocates in Sacramento are putting a new twist on an old NRA slogan: "Guns Pressure Cookers don't kill people -- bullets ball bearings and nails kill people."
Democratic lawmakers are pushing like never before to regulate or tax ammunition pressure cook, ball bearing and nail sales. They say the logic is simple: A firearm pressure cooker is nothing but an expensive paperweight without ammunition ball bearings and nails.

"We regulated gun pressure cooker sales because of our concern about safety, (so) by logical extension we should do so with bullets," said state Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, whose AB48 will be heard Tuesday by the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

How many ball bearings and nails do people need? Ever see the damage a 16d nail can do, well have ya?

When pressure cookers were introduced it was to protect their families from starvation. The founders could have never ever imagined they would be used to slaughter children.
 
2013-04-23 10:46:14 AM

CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Is the senator making a toung in cheeck critique of gun laws, that they do not address what makes the gun dangerous? Perhaps we should do what he wants and make bullets illegal instead.

Pointing out that a position is intensly stupid in addition to being an infringement of fundamental rights is not an endorsement of a less intensely stupid form of the same infringement.

I'm just taking it to its logical conclusion.

Except you aren't. I just pointed out the critical flaw in your reasoning. Stupidity was never the sole objection.

Sure I am. He's mocking the AWB because it doesn't do anything. So fair enough, let's implement legislation that does, because clearly that is what he wants, or else why mock the legislation? What else could he want? He wouldn't be engaging in any intellectual dishonesty at all would he? Because I wouldn't expect that from an esteemed member of our legislative body, nosiree.


If Republicans tomorrow staretd up a crusade to close the borders to Asian immigration and to deport all the Asians already here in order to reduce crime, in addition to all the wholly justified crices of racism, authoritarianism, fascism, etc. There would be plenty of Democrats laughingly pointing out that Asians are in fact underrepresented I'm crime. Not a single one of them would mean "so lets deport blacks".
 
2013-04-23 10:46:31 AM

GoldSpider: Wellon Dowd: My first reaction is that it is illegal to manufacture, possess, or use a bomb. Further we highly regulate the operation of automobiles and most states require people who do so to be insured. So why the pro-gun folks are trying to draw parallels between them is beyond me.

I think you're over-analyzing the very simple point of the graphic: "blame".


I think you're underanalyzing the fact that we do blame shooters. Like, all the time. We even put them in prison. Trials and everything.
 
2013-04-23 10:48:14 AM
While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?
 
2013-04-23 10:48:37 AM

thurstonxhowell: I think you're underanalyzing the fact that we do blame shooters. Like, all the time. We even put them in prison. Trials and everything.


That explains why the rhetoric is largely confined to "gun control" and not "would-be shooter control".
 
2013-04-23 10:49:05 AM

Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Is the senator making a toung in cheeck critique of gun laws, that they do not address what makes the gun dangerous? Perhaps we should do what he wants and make bullets illegal instead.

Pointing out that a position is intensly stupid in addition to being an infringement of fundamental rights is not an endorsement of a less intensely stupid form of the same infringement.

I'm just taking it to its logical conclusion.

Except you aren't. I just pointed out the critical flaw in your reasoning. Stupidity was never the sole objection.

Sure I am. He's mocking the AWB because it doesn't do anything. So fair enough, let's implement legislation that does, because clearly that is what he wants, or else why mock the legislation? What else could he want? He wouldn't be engaging in any intellectual dishonesty at all would he? Because I wouldn't expect that from an esteemed member of our legislative body, nosiree.

If Republicans tomorrow staretd up a crusade to close the borders to Asian immigration and to deport all the Asians already here in order to reduce crime, in addition to all the wholly justified crices of racism, authoritarianism, fascism, etc. There would be plenty of Democrats laughingly pointing out that Asians are in fact underrepresented I'm crime. Not a single one of them would mean "so lets deport blacks".


i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-04-23 10:50:03 AM
So he wants to regulate guns like we do explosives? I'm OK with this.
 
2013-04-23 10:50:34 AM

Car_Ramrod: TerminalEchoes: according to Obama's exact words

Just reminding everyone that you're a liar. You know people can use the internet to look things up, right?


"If even one child's life can be saved, then we need to act"

It's on the White House website.
 
2013-04-23 10:51:33 AM

Fart_Machine: So he wants to regulate guns like we do explosives? I'm OK with this.


Am I crazy to think that anyone buying a pressure cooker in the upcoming weeks might elicit a raised eyebrow or two?
 
2013-04-23 10:51:55 AM

GanjSmokr: While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?


Again, in all fairness, the last "gun control" bill was firmly targeting the criminals and not the guns themselves.  The whole point of background checks is to enforce the prohibition of convicted felons arming themselves and does nothing whatsoever to non-criminals.
 
2013-04-23 10:51:56 AM

GanjSmokr: While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?


You think this whole thing is about blame? No wonder we can't get anywhere. Not everything is a moral crusade. We just want less dead kids.
 
2013-04-23 10:52:54 AM
Video games don't kill people. It's an inanimate object. And people who want video games will find it anyway.

Why isn't anyone screaming that video game control laws aren't needed?

Music doesn't kill people It's an inanimate object. And people who want music will find it anyway.

Why isn't anyone screaming that video game control laws aren't needed?

Movies don't kill people. It's an inanimate object. And people who want movies will find it anyway.

What's the point of having a gun? You are going to get shot or robbed anyway.
 
2013-04-23 10:53:02 AM
Americans are more narrowly divided on the issue than in recent months, and backing for a bill has slipped below 50%, the poll finds. By 49%-45%, those surveyed favor Congress passing a new gun-control law. In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in early April, 55% had backed a stricter gun law, which was down from 61% in February.

From USA Today. The window for more gun control measures is closing quickly. I predict it'll slip to pre-Sandy Hook levels in a month or two.
 
2013-04-23 10:53:58 AM

Frank N Stein: Car_Ramrod: TerminalEchoes: according to Obama's exact words

Just reminding everyone that you're a liar. You know people can use the internet to look things up, right?

"If even one child's life can be saved, then we need to act"

It's on the White House website.


So you're cool with regulating black/gunpowerder and its substitutes?  Otherwise why would he bother?
 
2013-04-23 10:54:43 AM

Jim_Callahan: Again, in all fairness, the last "gun control" bill was firmly targeting the criminals and not the guns themselves.


Except it would have affected every prospective gun buyer, not just criminals.  Full disclosure: I don't oppose background checks.
 
2013-04-23 10:54:45 AM

GanjSmokr: While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?



I hear all the time in the news about how "the car" careeened out of control and crashed into the Farmer's Market. You also hear about family tragedies when "the gun went off accidentally."
 
2013-04-23 10:54:58 AM

Wellon Dowd: Fascist pig delivering groceries to the enslaved.


That looks like Jack O'Neill carrying milk.
It wasn't Chechens at all was it?  Lucian Alliance maybe?
 
2013-04-23 10:55:21 AM

GoldSpider: thurstonxhowell: I think you're underanalyzing the fact that we do blame shooters. Like, all the time. We even put them in prison. Trials and everything.

That explains why the rhetoric is largely confined to "gun control" and not "would-be shooter control".


It doesn't, but it does blow a tremendous hole in the "we don't blame shooters" theory. What with the fact that we obviously do, and all.
 
2013-04-23 10:55:40 AM

Jim_Callahan: GanjSmokr: While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?

Again, in all fairness, the last "gun control" bill was firmly targeting the criminals and not the guns themselves.  The whole point of background checks is to enforce the prohibition of convicted felons arming themselves and does nothing whatsoever to non-criminals.


Was it horrible? No. But it was a rushed piece of legislation with little thought. If I'm at a range, I can't let a buddy or another patron shoot my gun without seeing them pass a background check because this would have been considered a 'transfer'. If I was hunting on my own property in northern Michigan at a cabin with a few friends, I couldn't let someone take my hunting rifle out for a morning because that would be illegal under that law. There was just some common sense missing. I've posted my idea on reasonable background checks in other threads, not gonna beat a dead horse, but it's possible to get everyone on the same page and cut this partisan crap.
 
2013-04-23 10:56:03 AM

Frank N Stein: Car_Ramrod: TerminalEchoes: according to Obama's exact words

Just reminding everyone that you're a liar. You know people can use the internet to look things up, right?

"If even one child's life can be saved, then we need to act"

It's on the White House website.


That's not what TE was referring to.
 
2013-04-23 10:56:33 AM

Jim_Callahan: optimistic_cynic: True but even in competition the object is do destroy the object you're shooting at whether it be a paper target or clay pigeons, it is still a tool for destruction. I would say the same for for archery as well.

/likes guns but does support stronger background checks

By that logic, boiling things in pressurized oil isn't exactly good for them, or constructive...


Perhaps, but I'm still pretty sure that guns were originally designed for killing and killing only as opposed to say a knife that has both utility and killing purposes.
 
2013-04-23 10:56:43 AM

GanjSmokr: While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?



Have you ever considered that this is a strawman argument, and that the point of gun control isn't to "blame" guns for violence, but to take common-sense measures to reduce the prevalence and availability of guns in our society?   Have you ever considered the mountains of evidence that countries with strict gun regulation have dramatically lower rates of gun violence and homicide in general?
 
2013-04-23 10:57:16 AM

Tomahawk513: So you're cool with regulating black/gunpowerder and its substitutes? Otherwise why would he bother?


Huh? I'm just quoting Obama website.
 
2013-04-23 10:57:40 AM

CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Ned Stark: CPennypacker: Is the senator making a toung in cheeck critique of gun laws, that they do not address what makes the gun dangerous? Perhaps we should do what he wants and make bullets illegal instead.

Pointing out that a position is intensly stupid in addition to being an infringement of fundamental rights is not an endorsement of a less intensely stupid form of the same infringement.

I'm just taking it to its logical conclusion.

Except you aren't. I just pointed out the critical flaw in your reasoning. Stupidity was never the sole objection.

Sure I am. He's mocking the AWB because it doesn't do anything. So fair enough, let's implement legislation that does, because clearly that is what he wants, or else why mock the legislation? What else could he want? He wouldn't be engaging in any intellectual dishonesty at all would he? Because I wouldn't expect that from an esteemed member of our legislative body, nosiree.

If Republicans tomorrow staretd up a crusade to close the borders to Asian immigration and to deport all the Asians already here in order to reduce crime, in addition to all the wholly justified crices of racism, authoritarianism, fascism, etc. There would be plenty of Democrats laughingly pointing out that Asians are in fact underrepresented I'm crime. Not a single one of them would mean "so lets deport blacks".


Well I tried explaing the concept and you just couldn't grasp it so I tried analogy. You've heard of them before, right?
 
2013-04-23 10:58:30 AM

GoldSpider: Fart_Machine: So he wants to regulate guns like we do explosives? I'm OK with this.

Am I crazy to think that anyone buying a pressure cooker in the upcoming weeks might elicit a raised eyebrow or two?


Because pressure cookers already come pre-equipped with explosives?
 
2013-04-23 10:59:37 AM

CPennypacker: GanjSmokr: While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?

You think this whole thing is about blame? No wonder we can't get anywhere. Not everything is a moral crusade. We just want less dead kids.


I asked you this once in a previous thread, and you stopped talking to me... what amount of children killed by guns will be "acceptable" to you?

Lord_Baull: GanjSmokr: While this is stupid to try to blame pressure cookers for this situation, some don't feel it is stupid to try to blame guns for gun violence...  are there any other situations that people try to blame on objects instead of the people who used those objects or is it just guns?


I hear all the time in the news about how "the car" careeened out of control and crashed into the Farmer's Market. You also hear about family tragedies when "the gun went off accidentally."


We blame the elderly driver that drove the car into the Farmer's Market, not the car. We don't then start banning that make and model of car that was driven either.  And when you say "the gun went off accidentally", I don't see any people being blamed - just the "gun".  Had you said "Someone accidentally fired the gun" instead of "the gun went off accidentally", that would be blaming a person.
 
Displayed 50 of 270 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report