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.

(NYPost)   "Well gooooollly, what do you mean I can't take a loaded pistol to the top of the Empire State Building. Do you think you can hold this for me?"   (nypost.com) divider line 235
    More: Dumbass, Empire State Building, Tennessee Woman  
•       •       •

5426 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jul 2013 at 12:03 PM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-24 03:53:54 PM

fredklein: WalkingCarpet: , the main purpose of a firearm is to kill another living being.

Wrong. The purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet when triggered. Where that bullet goes and what happens because of it is up to the user.


Dammit, I've been wrong about the main purpose of firearms this whole time.  Tonight I'm going open my beer with a bullet or fire into the air to stop my dog from dragging his ass along the carpet.
 
2013-07-24 03:54:12 PM

dittybopper: mokinokaro: The only way to really implement a cross state system for gun permits would be building something only a step below a national registry

You mean like NICS?


No, like the NICS should be.
 
2013-07-24 03:54:16 PM

dittybopper: mokinokaro: The only way to really implement a cross state system for gun permits would be building something only a step below a national registry

You mean like NICS?


NICS has too many holes for this to work.   The system would have to be a lot more indepth in regards to the information it stores to work for this purpose due to how much laws differ between states.

And then each state has to agree on how accommodating they'll be in regards to the rules because there's no way you will get every state to agree to blanket allowances of CCW for anyone from, say, Vermont.   At that point they may as well not have their own rules.

Basically there's no real way to implement it without a massive violation of state rights.
 
2013-07-24 03:56:05 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: A gunsmith who doesn't think that the designed purpose of a tool is relevant?
So when you have to drive nails, you're totally OK with somebody handing you a hacksaw.
/Good to know.


If someone designed a hacksaw that actually performs better as a hammer, I might. ;-)

The designer's intentions don't imbue a tool with any particular anima or mystical purpose. Once it's made a tool can be used in whatever way someone finds it useful without regard to anyone else's prior intentions.

Some tools are better suited to some purposes than others. Some tools can be extremely useful in ways that their designers didn't envision. All tools are dangerous if used foolishly or maliciously.

None of that makes any tool good or evil, wrong or right.
 
2013-07-24 03:57:09 PM
A dopey Georgia tourist

Cut him some slack.  He saw Death Wish III once and was therefore certain that all of Manhattan was just like that.  Everyone back in Macon warned him not to go.
 
2013-07-24 03:57:17 PM

mokinokaro: Basically there's no real way to implement it without a massive violation of state rights.


Like an FFL?
 
2013-07-24 03:57:37 PM

Cork on Fork: Well, in fairness to us New Yorkers, there seems to be a lot of collateral damage when people use guns around the Empire State Building. Granted, that's because the NYPD likes to just shoot wildly until anyone/anything in the vicinity stops moving...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Empire_State_Building_shooting

The gun laws for people visiting New York City are quite simple to understand: you can't bring your gun. End of story. And the people who are authorized to bring guns to NYC (federal agents, etc.) would never have any doubt about it.

But maybe someone can explain to me why people always feel the need to ask where they check their gun when they enter a place. Is states where you can carry do you often need to check a gun at buildings or events?


I know a number of people like this.  They're generally highly informed about the dangers of the world and are convinced that if they don't have a gun they'll be raped in murdered, ESPECIALLY in big cities.  So they need to carry a gun everywhere.
 
2013-07-24 03:57:49 PM
How many times must I repeat this. NY dose NOT recognize the 2nd amendment.
 
2013-07-24 03:58:45 PM
dittybopper,
Secondary? You can read the annual report of the NRA Foundation. Seems to me that a cash outlay of $22 million in 2012 for the non-political safety and education programs is pretty significant compared to the $18 million the NRA-ILA spent on the 2012 elections.
Yes, they spent more on the safety stuff than politics. But you don't *SEE* that unless you're actually someone who shoots. Everyone can see their TV and print ads, but the only people who see the effects of a grant to a gun range to upgrade their indoor air system or backstop, or to increase the height of their berm, or (as in the case at the range where I'm a member) to pay for a new side berm to help keep bullets from straying off the rifle range are the people who actually *USE* those things.


I am impressed that the political donations are different then the member donations, given that they endorsed Romney over Obama for what I can see was no good reason other then he was a democrat.

But still almost half goes to politics, I am underwhelmed.

/But it is nice they may keep the social services money away from politics.
 
2013-07-24 03:58:48 PM

Norgle: I am sorry you cannot ordinarily walk down to the range and explode targets,


Actually I can and do :P
 
2013-07-24 03:58:52 PM

Cork on Fork: But maybe someone can explain to me why people always feel the need to ask where they check their gun when they enter a place. Is states where you can carry do you often need to check a gun at buildings or events?


In some places, yes.

Hell, you have to do that here in New York in certain circumstances.  I have to relinquish my pocket knife upon entering family court.  Security has always been great about it, and I get it back when I leave, but it got to the point where I'd just leave it in the car to avoid the (very mild) hassle.

/Certified foster parent.
//Goes to family court for all the right reasons.
 
2013-07-24 03:59:08 PM

Maul555: Coincidentally, this is also a perfectly valid reason to sneer and be an asshole to anyone with NY plates that you might happen to come across...


It's what Christ would have done.
 
2013-07-24 03:59:53 PM
Has anyone ever noticed what a farking hardon Dittybopitty has for guns?

It's alarming.
 
2013-07-24 04:00:33 PM
WalkingCarpet: Most people in NYC are perfectly fine with the restrictive carry laws that are in place.

Most democrats in Georgia were perfectly happy with restrictive race laws they had passed.


// majority != right
 
2013-07-24 04:02:21 PM

JesseL: demaL-demaL-yeH: A gunsmith who doesn't think that the designed purpose of a tool is relevant?
So when you have to drive nails, you're totally OK with somebody handing you a hacksaw.
/Good to know.

If someone designed a hacksaw that actually performs better as a hammer, I might. ;-)

The designer's intentions don't imbue a tool with any particular anima or mystical purpose. Once it's made a tool can be used in whatever way someone finds it useful without regard to anyone else's prior intentions.

Some tools are better suited to some purposes than others. Some tools can be extremely useful in ways that their designers didn't envision. All tools are dangerous if used foolishly or maliciously.

None of that makes any tool good or evil, wrong or right.


Fine and dandy, but the purpose of firearms is to kill at a distance, and they are highly suited to that purpose. It's what they were designed to be - highly effective and efficient killing machines.
 
2013-07-24 04:04:18 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: JesseL: demaL-demaL-yeH: A gunsmith who doesn't think that the designed purpose of a tool is relevant?
So when you have to drive nails, you're totally OK with somebody handing you a hacksaw.
/Good to know.

If someone designed a hacksaw that actually performs better as a hammer, I might. ;-)

The designer's intentions don't imbue a tool with any particular anima or mystical purpose. Once it's made a tool can be used in whatever way someone finds it useful without regard to anyone else's prior intentions.

Some tools are better suited to some purposes than others. Some tools can be extremely useful in ways that their designers didn't envision. All tools are dangerous if used foolishly or maliciously.

None of that makes any tool good or evil, wrong or right.

Fine and dandy, but the purpose of firearms is to kill at a distance, and they are highly suited to that purpose. It's what they were designed to be - highly effective and efficient killing machines.


Whoopty shiat.

They're good for plenty of other things too, and even killing at a distance (or close up, which they do well too) isn't necessarily a bad thing.
 
2013-07-24 04:08:37 PM
OnlyM3:  Most democrats in Georgia were perfectly happy with restrictive race laws they had passed.

// majority != right


Oh please, let's not turn this into a civil rights issue.

I agree that the majority isn't always right but imho they are right here, your mileage may vary and all that shiat.
 
2013-07-24 04:11:16 PM

WalkingCarpet: Oh please, let's not turn this into a civil rights issue.


How is the right to keep and bear arms not a civil rights issue?
 
2013-07-24 04:12:47 PM

mokinokaro: dittybopper: mokinokaro: The only way to really implement a cross state system for gun permits would be building something only a step below a national registry

You mean like NICS?

NICS has too many holes for this to work.   The system would have to be a lot more indepth in regards to the information it stores to work for this purpose due to how much laws differ between states.

And then each state has to agree on how accommodating they'll be in regards to the rules because there's no way you will get every state to agree to blanket allowances of CCW for anyone from, say, Vermont.   At that point they may as well not have their own rules.

Basically there's no real way to implement it without a massive violation of state rights.


What?

It would be pretty simple, really:  States report the following information on valid permits to a central database:

Permit number
Birth date of permit holder (but not name)
Last 4 or 5 digits of their drivers license or state photo ID number.

Cop finds an out-of-state person carrying, he queries the database with those 3 pieces of information.  It will come back as one of four results:

Valid (info matches database, state reports permit is valid)
Invalid (Info doesn't match, say, birthdate is incorrect)
Revoked (Info matches, permit has been revoked)
No Info (Permit isn't in the database).

Pretty simple, really, and names, addresses, and what guns the person owns don't have to be on the federal database.
 
2013-07-24 04:14:37 PM

JesseL: WalkingCarpet: Oh please, let's not turn this into a civil rights issue.

How is the right to keep and bear arms not a civil rights issue?


You're right it is a civil rights issue, I should have put a finer point on that.

I just don't think it's analogous to the history of segregation laws in the south.
 
2013-07-24 04:15:43 PM

DirkValentine: Has anyone ever noticed what a farking hardon Dittybopitty has for guns?

It's alarming.


You haven't seen my baby picture yet, have you?

img144.imageshack.us
 
2013-07-24 04:17:43 PM

WalkingCarpet: Oh please, let's not turn this into a civil rights issue.


Why?  Because that means you'll lose?
 
2013-07-24 04:18:36 PM

dittybopper: WalkingCarpet: Oh please, let's not turn this into a civil rights issue.

Why?  Because that means you'll lose?


Look up two posts.
 
2013-07-24 04:26:43 PM

WalkingCarpet: JesseL: WalkingCarpet: Oh please, let's not turn this into a civil rights issue.

How is the right to keep and bear arms not a civil rights issue?

You're right it is a civil rights issue, I should have put a finer point on that.

I just don't think it's analogous to the history of segregation laws in the south.


They may be more related than you think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Codes_%28United_States%29
 
2013-07-24 04:30:32 PM

Latinwolf: Tommy Moo: You just get arrested for possession of a legal gun at the Empire State Building? Is this like a NYC law? I live upstate, and you are definitely not simply arrested for having a legal gun with permit on you in public. It sounds like going up to a security guard/cop and informing them that you are carrying, and asking what the policy is for the premises, and if you can leave a gun with someone, is just about the most correct thing you can do in this situation.

Another NY state gun owner trying to pretend that he doesn't know the laws are different in NYC.


I have never owned a gun, actually. Believe it or not, sometimes people post questions in forums that the don't, in fact, already know the answer to, because they are interested in learning about a topic that is being discussed.
 
2013-07-24 04:45:39 PM

Tommy Moo: I have never owned a gun, actually.


god, you're not in crotchfester, are you?
 
2013-07-24 05:04:28 PM

dittybopper: Yanks_RSJ: No, the most correct thing a gun owner can do before traveling is to learn the gun laws in the specific area to which he will be traveling.

In NYC, you cannot carry a firearm without a permit issued by the city itself.

Because of the byzantine nature of local, state, and federal laws, along with the fact that some places chose to ignore federal laws about 'safe passage' (I'm looking at you NJ and NYC), what we really need is national reciprocity.

If you have a permit that passes some federal standard on training and background checks issued by your home state, then why not let them carry everywhere it's legal to carry a gun?

Tell you what:  In the true spirit of compromise, I'd be willing to accept universal background checks for all non-family gun transfers in order to get national reciprocity.

Deal?


There are no federal standards on CCW. Obtaining a CCW in Georgia means a) going down to the marriage and pistol license office (no, really, that's a thing) at your country courthouse b) letting them take your fingerprints and giving them $44. If you don't show up with a felony record, and you haven't been involuntarily committed to the nuthouse, they issue the license. No training required.

Utah is just as easy, and you can get that one through the mail regardless of where you live. It has the most reciprocity, iianm.

/I need to get my Georgia CCW renewed, not because I need to carry but because I collect guns and if you have the permit, you don't have to pay for the instant background check when you buy one.
//If you don't work at a liquor store or pawn shop, or as a rent collector, you, personally, do not need to carry.
 
2013-07-24 05:08:58 PM

Cork on Fork: radiumsoup: Well, duh - guns at the Empire State building are more dangerous than guns elsewhere . . . It has nothing to do with self defense, or anything about the training or intent of the person carrying, it's all about how deadly these things become in certain geographic places. What a moron.

Well, in fairness to us New Yorkers, there seems to be a lot of collateral damage when people use guns around the Empire State Building. Granted, that's because the NYPD likes to just shoot wildly until anyone/anything in the vicinity stops moving...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Empire_State_Building_shooting

The gun laws for people visiting New York City are quite simple to understand: you can't bring your gun. End of story. And the people who are authorized to bring guns to NYC (federal agents, etc.) would never have any doubt about it.

But maybe someone can explain to me why people always feel the need to ask where they check their gun when they enter a place. Is states where you can carry do you often need to check a gun at buildings or events?


Pretty much. They've loosened the law in Georgia (which used to be restrictive to the point of uselessness) to where about the only place you can't carry is a government building. If you're approaching a building with a metal detector, like the state capitol, and tell them you have a weapon, I don't think they'll check it for you, but they will just tell you to go lock it in your car.

I think it's hilarious that the majority of the Georgia legislature thinks everyone needs to walk around armed all the time, but NOT in the gallery of the House and Senate. Texas, at least, doesn't have that hypocrisy.
 
2013-07-24 05:22:25 PM

mbillips: If you're approaching a building with a metal detector, like the state capitol, and tell them you have a weapon, I don't think they'll check it for you, but they will just tell you to go lock it in your car.


Damn... seems like you wouldn't want people to be leaving loaded handguns in cars like that.

I can understand not wanting people to be armed in government buildings though. Too many reasons for someone to be upset at a legislator or judge or whoever and want to do something stupid. I know that in the federal courthouses here in NYC, even law enforcement has to check their weapons at the entrance (not sure about the state ones). As far as I know the only people who are armed in those buildings are the Marshals providing security.
 
2013-07-24 05:23:08 PM

Gordon Bennett: Eejits. I was under the impression that if you get to carry a deadly weapon then you accept extra responsibility to ensure that you obey all related laws. Now they've been arrested and if there is any justice will lose the right to carry a gun having now committed a gun related offence.

[penguinssauce.com image 300x157]

[25.media.tumblr.com image 400x240]


All right, settle down Bobby.
 
2013-07-24 05:51:08 PM

JesseL: WalkingCarpet: JesseL: WalkingCarpet: Oh please, let's not turn this into a civil rights issue.

How is the right to keep and bear arms not a civil rights issue?

You're right it is a civil rights issue, I should have put a finer point on that.

I just don't think it's analogous to the history of segregation laws in the south.

They may be more related than you think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Codes_%28United_States%29


Maybe but until people start getting lynched for owning guns I'm not sure the "gun owners are being persecuted like blacks were in the south" argument really works.

Look, I own a gun and have a concealed carry permit.  There hasn't been a single law passed or proposed that would ever infringe on that right.  I realize that's my own personal experience and not the same for everyone.  The gun rights movement has won, isn't that clear?  When Congress can't even pass a law for background checks that has upwards of 90% of the public's support, it's time to admit that the gun control debate is essentially over.

I just wish the gun lobby would stop grasping for more, no we don't need guns on college campuses and in bars and no we don't need more guns in NYC.

Having lived in or around NYC my whole life there isn't a single time I have ever thought that I'd feel safer if there were more guns around, especially concealed ones.

What, what the hell are we talking about again?  Jesus, I got lost there.
 
2013-07-24 05:52:40 PM
Is there any one of the amendments on the Bill of Rights that New Yorkers think being in New York City doesn't constitutes consent to suspend?
 
2013-07-24 06:07:12 PM

Tommy Moo: You just get arrested for possession of a legal gun at the Empire State Building? Is this like a NYC law? I live upstate, and you are definitely not simply arrested for having a legal gun with permit on you in public. It sounds like going up to a security guard/cop and informing them that you are carrying, and asking what the policy is for the premises, and if you can leave a gun with someone, is just about the most correct thing you can do in this situation.


Obviously you've never really scrutinized the laws of your state and NYC.  New York in general doesn't recognize other state's permits, and NYC doesn't even recognize state permits not issued within the city.  Ergo those people were carrying illegally *in* NYC.  On the other hand, if I remember right these criminal cases tend to not end well for the City; most lawyer up and there's relatively high amounts of support from the NRA and such that *want* a good supreme court case to get NYC gun laws tossed out.

Thunderboy: Tommy Moo: New York does allow for concealed carry with a permit:

Good luck getting one.


In certain areas it's not difficult at all (Grandparents live in Ticonderoga, which fits 'upstate NY'), in others like NYC you'd better be ponying up $$$ to the political campaign funds for various officials.

Yanks_RSJ: however I do not want a city full of armed tourists, regardless of the background checks.


Is that because it'd make you 'feel' less safe, or do you have any evidence that said armed tourists would shoot up the place any more than the current residents with (illegal) handguns do?

LineNoise: Typically if you are clean NYC will also let you plead these down to something that doesn't require jail.


I think this is partially so that they actually make a profit from the fines and such(jail wipes that out very quickly) while wanting the person to plead and get the hell out.  They know that if they *don't* offer good pleas there's every chance the NRA or similar organization(GOA?) will take up their cause and attempt to run it up to the supreme court, and that would be extremely expensive and potentially very bad for their extra control.

demaL-demaL-yeH: Nope. Lots of families have felons and mentally ill members.


Yeah, but I know who the felons(couple cousins) and mentally ill(grandfather, sort of) in my family are.  I think there should also be a 'loan' exemption, and that the check should be free without having to visit a FFL.  Knowingly providing a firearm to a disallowed person should still be a crime.

Englebert Slaptyback: I recall reading somewhere that in the 1950s the NRA was all about teaching firearm safety and (as you mentioned) marksmanship and skill. They were even in favor of reasonable laws concerning firearms.


The transformation was spurred by a previously unprecedented attack on the RKBA, followed by more and more stupid legislation.  Technically speaking the NRA is still in favor of 'reasonable' laws, it's just that their definition of 'reasonable' varies a lot from the gun-grabbers.

poot_rootbeer: "I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire 600 shots or only 599?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a 3D printed AR-16, a homemade hobbyist replica of one of the most influential selective-fire rifle designs in the world, and could blow up in my face, I've got to ask you one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do I, punk?"


*Snerk*.  AR-15, not 16.  Lower receiver = trigger section, not the chamber/barrel that contains the 'boom' of the shot.  You're not going to get 3D printed AR Uppers(barrel, chamber, bolt) until the printers are capable of printing something at least as strong as forged steel.

demaL-demaL-yeH: Can you think of any non-military motor vehicles that are designed for the purpose of killing? Motor vehicles are subject to all kinds of safety, licensing, use, and registration standards at every level of government.


So aren't firearms.  Fire one off in an unsafe manner?  Negligent discharge criminal charge.  Fire one in the City?  Noise ordinance violation.  Carrying w/o a permit is illegal in most states, and you can't hunt in most states unless you're hella old or have taken a hunter's safety class.  In addition you also have background checks and licensing of dealers.
 
2013-07-24 06:47:00 PM

KelvinTheClown: Remember, gay marriage licenses from state to state will be honored, but your gun permit is not.


You have earned your name!
 
2013-07-24 07:17:11 PM

vudukungfu: Tommy Moo: I have never owned a gun, actually.

god, you're not in crotchfester, are you?


Trying to leave. Why?
 
2013-07-24 07:53:02 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: fredklein: WalkingCarpet: , the main purpose of a firearm is to kill another living being.

Wrong. The purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet at a lethal velocity when triggered. Where that bullet goes and what happens because of it is up to the user.FTFY


Any velocity can be lethal. A boulder approaching you at 1mph can crush you if you don't get out of the way. So what you added is meaningless.
 
2013-07-24 07:56:31 PM

way south: In a just world people would be given the benefit of a doubt when they try to make good on an honest mistake.


That's oddly inconsistent with your previous statement that "Inconsistent application of the law is akin to tyranny."
 
2013-07-24 07:56:59 PM

Cagey B: fredklein: Skanque: Are you completely naive? You live in upstate NY and you don't know about the really strict gun laws in NYC?

Are you completely naive? You live in The United States and you don't know about the Second Amendment?

The Second Amendment, even under the most recent interpretations by the Supreme Court, does not entitle a person to complete, unlimited and untrammeled access to all weapons or the use thereof.

"the Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Sounds to me like it DOES entitle a person (a member of "the People") to complete, unlimited and untrammeled access ("shall not be infringed") to all weapons or the use thereof.

 
2013-07-24 08:09:20 PM

fredklein: Cagey B: fredklein: Skanque: Are you completely naive? You live in upstate NY and you don't know about the really strict gun laws in NYC?

Are you completely naive? You live in The United States and you don't know about the Second Amendment?

The Second Amendment, even under the most recent interpretations by the Supreme Court, does not entitle a person to complete, unlimited and untrammeled access to all weapons or the use thereof.

"the Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Sounds to me like it DOES entitle a person (a member of "the People") to complete, unlimited and untrammeled access ("shall not be infringed") to all weapons or the use thereof.


Is a convicted felon also a person?
 
2013-07-24 08:24:40 PM

iambronco: Agree or disagree with the idea of national CCW reciprocity, but trying to differentiate car licensing from firearm licensing on the premise of design is somewhat silly.


(snip irrelevant sophistry)

Driving a car is not a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution, so your argument is invalid.
 
2013-07-24 08:31:38 PM
So this fellow didn't hurt anyone, didn't damage anything, and thought he was doing the right thing? Good thing we ruined his life and made him hate the authorities.
 
2013-07-24 08:32:12 PM

fredklein: demaL-demaL-yeH: fredklein: WalkingCarpet: , the main purpose of a firearm is to kill another living being.

Wrong. The purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet at a lethal velocity when triggered. Where that bullet goes and what happens because of it is up to the user.FTFY

Any velocity can be lethal. A boulder approaching you at 1mph can crush you if you don't get out of the way. So what you added is meaningless.


You have an multiple-boulder capacity, handheld, concealable boulder-launcher?
Firearms are killing machines by design.
 
2013-07-24 08:38:28 PM

fredklein: Cagey B: fredklein: Skanque: Are you completely naive? You live in upstate NY and you don't know about the really strict gun laws in NYC?

Are you completely naive? You live in The United States and you don't know about the Second Amendment?

The Second Amendment, even under the most recent interpretations by the Supreme Court, does not entitle a person to complete, unlimited and untrammeled access to all weapons or the use thereof.

"the Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Sounds to me like it DOES entitle a person (a member of "the People") to complete, unlimited and untrammeled access ("shall not be infringed") to all weapons or the use thereof.


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

Very well.
I'll see your out-of-shape, overweight ass at drill Sunday. Have all your weapons, ammunition, and equipment there and ready for inspection: You will be held to military standards. Expect to be sore.

/Just because the Supremes pulled another Plessy does not mean that you get out of the named responsibility.
 
2013-07-24 09:27:47 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: fredklein: demaL-demaL-yeH: fredklein: WalkingCarpet: , the main purpose of a firearm is to kill another living being.

Wrong. The purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet at a lethal velocity when triggered. Where that bullet goes and what happens because of it is up to the user.FTFY

Any velocity can be lethal. A boulder approaching you at 1mph can crush you if you don't get out of the way. So what you added is meaningless.

You have an multiple-boulder capacity, handheld, concealable boulder-launcher?
Firearms are killing machines by design.


I'm sure it will come as a great comfort when someone beats you to death with a waffle iron, that it wasn't designed for killing.
 
2013-07-24 09:28:34 PM

DoctorCal: way south: In a just world people would be given the benefit of a doubt when they try to make good on an honest mistake.

That's oddly inconsistent with your previous statement that "Inconsistent application of the law is akin to tyranny."


More like the consistent application of inconsistent laws from people who think judges should be replaced with flowcharts.
We have criminals who carry illegal weapons with total disregard for authority, yet we punish someone more severely for admitting an error.

In the practical sense the government will spend alot of effort prosecuting people who aren't criminally inclined.
It gives politicians something to brag about, but this doesn't actually help anyone.
 
2013-07-24 09:35:21 PM

way south: DoctorCal: way south: In a just world people would be given the benefit of a doubt when they try to make good on an honest mistake.

That's oddly inconsistent with your previous statement that "Inconsistent application of the law is akin to tyranny."

More like the consistent application of inconsistent laws from people who think judges should be replaced with flowcharts.
We have criminals who carry illegal weapons with total disregard for authority, yet we punish someone more severely for admitting an error.

In the practical sense the government will spend alot of effort prosecuting people who aren't criminally inclined.
It gives politicians something to brag about, but this doesn't actually help anyone.


And yet, in the past, you have rabidly encouraged it. So strange.
 
2013-07-24 09:54:15 PM

Cagey B: You can argue reciprocity and how unjust it is that there are any restrictions at all on your ability to be armed all you like. If you seriously think it's a good idea to bring a gun to the Empire State Building, you're a complete f*ckwit, and have no business owning things that require a responsible adult to operate.



I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried off by one
 
2013-07-24 09:55:04 PM
www.wired.com
Now my last post makes more sense
 
2013-07-24 10:12:19 PM
I agree with Ditty on this one.

All states should honor other states common-sense gun regulations.
 
2013-07-24 10:13:13 PM
If he drove from Georgia, it's practically certain he also violated the laws on transporting guns through Maryland. A loaded pistol in the glove compartment there is a free GO TO JAIL card if a cop finds out.
 
Displayed 50 of 235 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report