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.

(Russia Today)   Connecticut has created tens of thousands of newly minted criminals, because some residents are refusing to register guns under a new law enacted after the Sandy Hook School shooting   (rt.com) divider line 441
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4754 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Feb 2014 at 3:03 AM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-13 04:29:14 AM  

Aigoo: Jesus Christ, put on your big boy/girl panties you bunch of pussies. Stop acting like Americans constantly accuse the French of acting and farking grow a pair. Never thought I'd live to see the day when the whole damned country needed to be tucked in with a teddy bear and a goddamned night light.


Her, folks, stripped of all phony "maturity" and fake reasonableness, is the gun fapper argument - if you don't agree with them - you're a great big sissy. You can't really argue with that.
I don't mean to say it's correct - you just can't argue with it.
 
2014-02-13 04:29:28 AM  

Boojum2k: demaL-demaL-yeH: My whacky idea

No, that wasn't your whacky idea.
Whacky idea part 1, and I quote:
It's long past time for those bearing arms- which really is military service
Whacky idea part 2, quote again
I'm talking about reinstating the organized Militia.
We meet in the equivalent of the town square, drill, train, and qualify with our arms and ammunition, which are inspected.
Every person 16 legally present in the United States and over until death dost thou part participates to the fullest extent possible - participation mandatory and with real penalties attached for missing drill.
Alternative service is done by felons, the mentally ill, physically disabled, and conscientious objectors.
Everybody is screened, physically and mentally for fitness for duty, and must meet minimum standards.
You can own whatever firearms you qualify with, and you must keep them in proper repair and properly secured.
Crew-served weapons are stored at the armory.

http://www.fark.com/comments/8136924/Local-community-organizer-who-a dv ocated-passage-of-NY-SAFE-act-that-forbids-firearms-on-school-grounds- arrested-forwait-for-it


It's what the Swiss do.
It's what the Founders did.
It's what the Constitution specifically calls for.
There's nothing whacky about it.
It lets us cut the DoD budget and ensures that people of draft age are physically and mentally fit, and are competent with firearms.
What the fark is your problem with that?
Are you one of those entitlement types who believes that rights don't come with concomitant responsibilities?
 
2014-02-13 04:30:53 AM  

hardinparamedic: And as a CCP holder, I think I'll continue to abide by the law instead of being paranoid that GUBAMENT GON COME AND TAKE MAH GUNS! and promote inane conspiracy theories with no proof behind them.


Christ, you are either one dense motherfarker, or trolling. There is no denying that the government has illegally confiscated firearms in the past (there's plenty of proof), and that any type of registry/list of gun owners makes it that much easier for them to do it again (simple common sense here).

hardinparamedic: And I'll sleep better knowing there is at least some vetting and a basic level of competency of the people who pack heat on the street.


And I never said otherwise. Personally, I have had neither the want, nor the the need for a CCP. Should that ever change, I most certainly will jump through all necessary hoops to legally obtain said permit.
 
2014-02-13 04:33:13 AM  

Pokey.Clyde: There is no denying that the government has illegally confiscated firearms in the past (there's plenty of proof), and that any type of registry/list of gun owners makes it that much easier for them to do it again (simple common sense here).


No one has denied that the Government has illegally confiscated firearms.

What they have done is called you out over an inane conspiracy theory that makes gun owners like me look like mentally unbalanced Alex Jones fanboys, and helps fuel the stereotype of the Paranoid Fudd.
 
2014-02-13 04:33:28 AM  

hardinparamedic: Pokey.Clyde: Maybe they used the CCP list, maybe they didn't. We'll never know for sure. However, that doesn't invalidate my points.

- the government has illegally confiscated firearms in the past
- any type of registry/list of gun owners makes it that much easier for them to do it again

And yes, they will do it again.

And as a CCP holder, I think I'll continue to abide by the law instead of being paranoid that GUBAMENT GON COME AND TAKE MAH GUNS! and promote inane conspiracy theories with no proof behind them.

And I'll sleep better knowing there is at least some vetting and a basic level of competency of the people who pack heat on the street.


But this isn't talking about CCP/CCL holders. This is talking about rifle owners and non-permit holders who are being told to register any firearm that has a capacity over <insert arbitrary capacity determined by legislator in whatever state> that if they do not register a firearm, they are felons.

Completely different situation, hardinparamedic. Many times I agree with you. This time, I do not. Because you are conflating the issue of concealed carry with gun ownership and the two are not mutually inclusive.

While I agree that violent offenders (that is, those who have been convicted of violent crimes), stalkers, people with restraining orders/no contact orders, mentally ill/mentally deficient/mentally incapacitated in any way individuals shouldn't be allowed to own or be in possession of firearms and that those who do possess firearms ought to have at least basic safety and marksmanship, I do agree that history has proven over and over ad nauseum that government-mandated registration does tend to lead to weapons confiscation. And the rallying cry used throughout the 20th century was almost always "think of the children!" and "safety and security!"

Not to be the jackass who Godwins the thread, but talk to a German old enough to remember. Because I have--just this week, in fact. And they are horrified that we are allowing this to happen in this country. And no, they are not registering their guns because they remember all too well what happened the last time they did.
 
2014-02-13 04:33:30 AM  

Pokey.Clyde: Personally, I have had neither the want, nor the the need for a CCP. Should that ever change, I most certainly will jump through all necessary hoops to legally obtain said permit.


Same here. There's a lot to dislike about where I live, but they'll never give me any crap about any firearms I wish to own.
 
2014-02-13 04:34:49 AM  

Aigoo: hardinparamedic: Pokey.Clyde: Maybe they used the CCP list, maybe they didn't. We'll never know for sure. However, that doesn't invalidate my points.

- the government has illegally confiscated firearms in the past
- any type of registry/list of gun owners makes it that much easier for them to do it again

And yes, they will do it again.

And as a CCP holder, I think I'll continue to abide by the law instead of being paranoid that GUBAMENT GON COME AND TAKE MAH GUNS! and promote inane conspiracy theories with no proof behind them.

And I'll sleep better knowing there is at least some vetting and a basic level of competency of the people who pack heat on the street.

But this isn't talking about CCP/CCL holders. This is talking about rifle owners and non-permit holders who are being told to register any firearm that has a capacity over <insert arbitrary capacity determined by legislator in whatever state> that if they do not register a firearm, they are felons.

Completely different situation, hardinparamedic. Many times I agree with you. This time, I do not. Because you are conflating the issue of concealed carry with gun ownership and the two are not mutually inclusive.

While I agree that violent offenders (that is, those who have been convicted of violent crimes), stalkers, people with restraining orders/no contact orders, mentally ill/mentally deficient/mentally incapacitated in any way individuals shouldn't be allowed to own or be in possession of firearms and that those who do possess firearms ought to have at least basic safety and marksmanship, I do agree that history has proven over and over ad nauseum that government-mandated registration does tend to lead to weapons confiscation. And the rallying cry used throughout the 20th century was almost always "think of the children!" and "safety and security!"

Not to be the jackass who Godwins the thread, but talk to a German old enough to remember. Because I have--just this week, in fact. And they are horr ...


Lots of golden paving stones with the words "good intentions" on them. . .
 
2014-02-13 04:35:09 AM  

hardinparamedic: Aigoo: Made so much sense that in an EF5 with no houses standing, our governor threw DHS and their drones the hell out of the STATE. See, we saw what happened in Katrina and passed a little law down here that said "you don't get to claim 'state of emergency' and take our guns." I think there was one case of attempted looting in Moore last May. Notice the word 'attempted'. Because DHS got tossed out within a few hours of arriving and everyone still had their personal firearms. No one got shot to death, but looting? Yeah. Not so much.

Necessary my ass.

That's pretty interesting, considering FEMA can't even step foot inside of your state without the request of the Governor through a request from the State EMA.

So less "threw them out of the state", and more "didn't request help from FEMA in the first place"


FEMA and DHA are not one and the same. Two different agencies. ;)
 
2014-02-13 04:37:01 AM  

Aigoo: Not to be the jackass who Godwins the thread, but talk to a German old enough to remember. Because I have--just this week, in fact. And they are horrified that we are allowing this to happen in this country. And no, they are not registering their guns because they remember all too well what happened the last time they did.


Your argument has one fundamental flaw: Adolf Hitler, whom you are referring to, was instrumental in loosening the totalitarian gun ownership restrictions that were imposed on Germany post Treaty of Versailles. In fact, private gun ownership was highly encouraged for the German citizen, and until fall of 1938, was not restricted except based on age. Even then, it was imposed on the Jewish and Jewish descendants, during the war private gun ownership was highly encouraged, and Hitler's designers even developed Volkweapons for the planned total war that became increasingly on the horizon with the progression of WWII.
 
2014-02-13 04:37:58 AM  

Aigoo: FEMA and DHA are not one and the same. Two different agencies. ;)


FEMA is under the Department of Homeland Security.

www.its.dot.gov
 
2014-02-13 04:40:49 AM  

jso2897: Aigoo: Jesus Christ, put on your big boy/girl panties you bunch of pussies. Stop acting like Americans constantly accuse the French of acting and farking grow a pair. Never thought I'd live to see the day when the whole damned country needed to be tucked in with a teddy bear and a goddamned night light.

Her, folks, stripped of all phony "maturity" and fake reasonableness, is the gun fapper argument - if you don't agree with them - you're a great big sissy. You can't really argue with that.
I don't mean to say it's correct - you just can't argue with it.


No, it's more like "roll over and let your rights--all of them--be taken away in the name of "security" all you like. First Amendment? Hey, who cares if reporters get indicted for, well, you know, reporting? Second Amendment? Who needs self-defense? Third? Hey, let the police or whatever agency use your home as a staging ground, no worries! Fourth? Sure, you can frisk me, rifle through my belongings, search my phone, ipod, tablet, hard drives, read my e-mail...no worries! I have nothing to hide!

It's all in the name of National Security, so your Constitutional rights don't matter as long as the Government keeps you safe, right?

Nothing to do with guns. Everything to do with the Constitution. And I'll make the same argument in every NSA thread, every TSA thread, every cop breaking in and tasering/arresting you so they can use your house to stage a raid thread... but nice try there.

Sleep tight with your binky and night light. ;)
 
2014-02-13 04:44:50 AM  

Aigoo: jso2897: Aigoo: Jesus Christ, put on your big boy/girl panties you bunch of pussies. Stop acting like Americans constantly accuse the French of acting and farking grow a pair. Never thought I'd live to see the day when the whole damned country needed to be tucked in with a teddy bear and a goddamned night light.

Her, folks, stripped of all phony "maturity" and fake reasonableness, is the gun fapper argument - if you don't agree with them - you're a great big sissy. You can't really argue with that.
I don't mean to say it's correct - you just can't argue with it.

No, it's more like "roll over and let your rights--all of them--be taken away in the name of "security" all you like. First Amendment? Hey, who cares if reporters get indicted for, well, you know, reporting? Second Amendment? Who needs self-defense? Third? Hey, let the police or whatever agency use your home as a staging ground, no worries! Fourth? Sure, you can frisk me, rifle through my belongings, search my phone, ipod, tablet, hard drives, read my e-mail...no worries! I have nothing to hide!

It's all in the name of National Security, so your Constitutional rights don't matter as long as the Government keeps you safe, right?

Nothing to do with guns. Everything to do with the Constitution. And I'll make the same argument in every NSA thread, every TSA thread, every cop breaking in and tasering/arresting you so they can use your house to stage a raid thread... but nice try there.

Sleep tight with your binky and night light. ;)


I wasn't even about to disagree with you about anything - but if I had been - that line of argument really just ......doesn't mean anything. The second amendment is actually important - and deserves better defenders.
i18.photobucket.com
 
2014-02-13 04:45:08 AM  

Aigoo: Nothing to do with guns. Everything to do with the Constitution. And I'll make the same argument in every NSA thread, every TSA thread, every cop breaking in and tasering/arresting you so they can use your house to stage a raid thread... but nice try there.


This. That comment you were responding to made me wish Fark had a "Dumb!" button.
 
2014-02-13 04:48:32 AM  

hardinparamedic: Aigoo: FEMA and DHA are not one and the same. Two different agencies. ;)

FEMA is under the Department of Homeland Security.

[www.its.dot.gov image 515x395]


Maybe so, but I stood there and watched DHS get booted. They were bringing drones in to 'provide security' and the governor said "you're not." There's a pretty ironclad agreement about where drones are permitted, and she called in LEOs from neighboring towns to assist the first couple days until more local police could compensate.

But you are right about one thing: despite Obama's promises, FEMA did jack all. They were here, but very few people got help from them. Likely because our governor makes no secret at all about her loathing of the President (which I don't like him either, but she should show a little respect for the office, regardless of her feelings about who holds it, but our governor is functionally retarded 85% of the time).
 
2014-02-13 04:52:26 AM  
So much for the law abiding gun owner myth.

Law says register your guns, you register. You deserve the conviction and removal of your 2nd amendment rights.

PS the 2nd says you can have a gun, it doesnt say under what terms and conditions.
 
2014-02-13 04:56:19 AM  

Boojum2k: Aigoo: Nothing to do with guns. Everything to do with the Constitution. And I'll make the same argument in every NSA thread, every TSA thread, every cop breaking in and tasering/arresting you so they can use your house to stage a raid thread... but nice try there.

This. That comment you were responding to made me wish Fark had a "Dumb!" button.


You guys are the gun grabbers favorite gun fappers - you are their poster children for the attack on gun rights.
Your juvenile, emotional, fake-macho arguments make gun rights advocates look like children. There are times I actually suspect some of you of being false flags - your "arguments" are that counterproductive.
But keep on handing them evidence that gun owners are all idiots - your personal emotional gratification is what's at stake here, I guess.
 
2014-02-13 04:56:56 AM  

jso2897: You guys are the gun grabbers favorite gun fappers


And that is why you are dumb.
 
2014-02-13 05:00:10 AM  

jso2897: Aigoo: jso2897: Aigoo: Jesus Christ, put on your big boy/girl panties you bunch of pussies. Stop acting like Americans constantly accuse the French of acting and farking grow a pair. Never thought I'd live to see the day when the whole damned country needed to be tucked in with a teddy bear and a goddamned night light.

Her, folks, stripped of all phony "maturity" and fake reasonableness, is the gun fapper argument - if you don't agree with them - you're a great big sissy. You can't really argue with that.
I don't mean to say it's correct - you just can't argue with it.

No, it's more like "roll over and let your rights--all of them--be taken away in the name of "security" all you like. First Amendment? Hey, who cares if reporters get indicted for, well, you know, reporting? Second Amendment? Who needs self-defense? Third? Hey, let the police or whatever agency use your home as a staging ground, no worries! Fourth? Sure, you can frisk me, rifle through my belongings, search my phone, ipod, tablet, hard drives, read my e-mail...no worries! I have nothing to hide!

It's all in the name of National Security, so your Constitutional rights don't matter as long as the Government keeps you safe, right?

Nothing to do with guns. Everything to do with the Constitution. And I'll make the same argument in every NSA thread, every TSA thread, every cop breaking in and tasering/arresting you so they can use your house to stage a raid thread... but nice try there.

Sleep tight with your binky and night light. ;)

I wasn't even about to disagree with you about anything - but if I had been - that line of argument really just ......doesn't mean anything. The second amendment is actually important - and deserves better defenders.
[i18.photobucket.com image 480x360]


It's more like I am so pissed off at the people like the fist person quoted in that (I think): "oh, just register them, it's good for everyone and you're not a felon that way. Guns are bad, mmmkay?"

Guns are inanimate pieces of metal and plastic. They are neither bad nor good--they have no thoughts, no feelings, and cannot take any action of themselves. They're paperweights.

The people that utilize them... they are a different story.

But attributing thought or emotion to a piece of metal and plastic is like saying that a pen is evil or a phone is dangerous. Sure, a phone is dangerous if you throw it at someone's head and hit them in the eye, but otherwise, it pretty much sits on the table and does nothing until you pick it up.

The binky and nightlight comment wasn't directed at you, personally, it's directed at the... people... like the dude saying "oh, just register them so you're not felons." And "oh, but it was necessary to collect all the guns in New Orleans during Katrina." These are the same kinds of people that think that the TSA is necessary and prevents terrorism and keeps us safe, that the NSA spying is ok because if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't be concerned (we've all heard these arguments, and they're nonsensical in my opinion). I'm sorry. I took and take my oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic very seriously. I take the Constitution very seriously. These rights were so important 240 years ago that a bunch of guys who couldn't agree on whether or not to have a strong central government or a weak central government with states having more autonomy were able to agree that these were important enough to be the building blocks of our country. And for the last 20 years, and especially the last 14, we've been pissing them away in the name of letting the government keep us safe. So yeah, I wonder what the holy fark is wrong with people. I won't apologize for that, but I will apologize for being abrasive about it.
 
2014-02-13 05:01:14 AM  

Piizzadude: So much for the law abiding gun owner myth.

Law says register your guns, you register. You deserve the conviction and removal of your 2nd amendment rights.

PS the 2nd says you can have a gun, it doesnt say under what terms and conditions.


Please try to understand that the people who dominate these discussions do not represent adult, lawful gun owners.
You are listening to the loony outliers, and they speak only for themselves. Most of us comply with the law and work to change it where we disagree with it. And I do not think the Conn. legislation will stand - but in the meantime relax - the grownup 98% of us are not going to go all Randy Weaver on you - please don't listen to these idiots.
 
2014-02-13 05:01:36 AM  

Aigoo: FEMA did jack all.


Under the NIMS framework, FEMA can't do ANYTHING without the go-ahead of the local incident command authority on site - their philosophy is literally we're here to help the locals when they ask for it, and the incident is best managed at the local level unless it's an incident of national significance.

You might quite literally be correct in that the Governor blocked them after requesting them in the first place (literally, until requested by the GOvernor his/herself, the only FEMA that can step foot in the state is an advanced disaster assessment team who's job is to provide intel to other responders, and has no authority.)

Aigoo: Maybe so, but I stood there and watched DHS get booted. They were bringing drones in to 'provide security' and the governor said "you're not." There's a pretty ironclad agreement about where drones are permitted, and she called in LEOs from neighboring towns to assist the first couple days until more local police could compensate.


FEMA has started using the drones for SAR operations in large disaster areas. Their high loiter times and advanced, real time visual signatures make them perfect for locating victims over large areas. To be quite honest, it won't be too long down the road until USAR teams are using AR-Parrot style drones equipped with thermal and infrared sensors to augment their searches.

/FEMA Disaster Contractor employee.
 
2014-02-13 05:05:04 AM  

jso2897: Most of us comply with the law and work to change it where we disagree with it. And I do not think the Conn. legislation will stand


Now you've swung from dumb to smart. But really, you come in and start ranting about "gun-fappers" particularly when I just researched and looked up a point about court decisions to thoroughly shoot down one incorrect post, and then apparently lump everyone in favor of gun rights into it, you're going to be called dumb. At least.
 
2014-02-13 05:07:42 AM  

jso2897: Piizzadude: So much for the law abiding gun owner myth.

Law says register your guns, you register. You deserve the conviction and removal of your 2nd amendment rights.

PS the 2nd says you can have a gun, it doesnt say under what terms and conditions.

Please try to understand that the people who dominate these discussions do not represent adult, lawful gun owners.
You are listening to the loony outliers, and they speak only for themselves. Most of us comply with the law and work to change it where we disagree with it. And I do not think the Conn. legislation will stand - but in the meantime relax - the grownup 98% of us are not going to go all Randy Weaver on you - please don't listen to these idiots.


I understand and respect your POV, and I agree that it more than likely will get shot down in the courts, but until then...
 
2014-02-13 05:08:29 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: So you believe that people who are mentally ill should have firearms, no matter that the Supreme Court specifically said that they should not.


Question: What is mentally ill? Is the person who thinks bowls should be stacked a certain way mentally ill? How about the person who simply can't sleep at night?

Do I think that some mentally ill people need a gun? No. All? Not so much.
 
2014-02-13 05:09:21 AM  

Piizzadude: I agree that it more than likely will get shot down in the courts, but until then...


Maybe they can convince this guy to retire and take his anti-constitution bullshiat home:

Late last month United States District Judge Alfred Covello issued a 47-page ruling calling Gov. Malloy's legislation constitutional, even though it imposed some restrictions on firearm owners.
"While the act burdens the plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights, it is substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control," Covello ruled

You could fertilize the Sahara with that much bullshiat.
 
2014-02-13 05:09:48 AM  

Aigoo: A whole bunch of stuff I've heard before six million times and agree with 97% of.



Yes. I know all that - I don't need to hear any of it for the 800 th time.
This attitude of superior wisdom won't win you any friends either - it's not much more helpful than the "You're a sissy!" argument. Try approaching people as if they were other adults who you respect, and addressing their concerns. Most gun legislation is illogical and badly conceived - and with patience and respect, most reasonable people can be gotten to see it. That's why we have been winning this debate, up until recently, anyway.
But the adamant preaching, the insults, and in worst case scenarios, thinly veiled threats (you don't do this, that I have seen) - none of that stuff helps - not one little bit.

And yes, Boojum - I am dumb - you win.

 Idiots. Goodbye.
 
2014-02-13 05:10:30 AM  

hardinparamedic: Aigoo: FEMA did jack all.

Under the NIMS framework, FEMA can't do ANYTHING without the go-ahead of the local incident command authority on site - their philosophy is literally we're here to help the locals when they ask for it, and the incident is best managed at the local level unless it's an incident of national significance.

You might quite literally be correct in that the Governor blocked them after requesting them in the first place (literally, until requested by the GOvernor his/herself, the only FEMA that can step foot in the state is an advanced disaster assessment team who's job is to provide intel to other responders, and has no authority.)

Aigoo: Maybe so, but I stood there and watched DHS get booted. They were bringing drones in to 'provide security' and the governor said "you're not." There's a pretty ironclad agreement about where drones are permitted, and she called in LEOs from neighboring towns to assist the first couple days until more local police could compensate.

FEMA has started using the drones for SAR operations in large disaster areas. Their high loiter times and advanced, real time visual signatures make them perfect for locating victims over large areas. To be quite honest, it won't be too long down the road until USAR teams are using AR-Parrot style drones equipped with thermal and infrared sensors to augment their searches.

/FEMA Disaster Contractor employee.


LOL... yeeeaaaah.... this is Oklahoma. Perhaps you've heard of this state? Oklahoma City isn't terribad, but this place is so red we make Texas look like a blue state. And our governor is as functionally retarded as Rick Perry. (Dear God, somebody find us a governor with a functional brain cell... please?)

But for what it's worth, given the President's track record with drones, I don't give a damn what they're used for, I do not trust our government with drones on US soil for any reason whatsoever. So I support that call and would support it again. I'll personally go house to house before I'll trust a drone in Oklahoma skies. Talk about a guy who shouldn't have access to weapons. Jesus!
 
2014-02-13 05:12:13 AM  

jso2897: Most gun legislation is illogical and badly conceived


Best answer to that I've seen in a while:
http://www.youtube.com/w atch?v=ixhsuB6xMR8
 
2014-02-13 05:13:12 AM  

hardinparamedic: FEMA has started using the drones for SAR operations in large disaster areas. Their high loiter times and advanced, real time visual signatures make them perfect for locating victims over large areas. To be quite honest, it won't be too long down the road until USAR teams are using AR-Parrot style drones equipped with thermal and infrared sensors to augment their searches./FEMA Disaster Contractor employee.


I'm good with drones being used for SAR and similar missions.
 
2014-02-13 05:13:40 AM  

Boojum2k: Piizzadude: I agree that it more than likely will get shot down in the courts, but until then...

Maybe they can convince this guy to retire and take his anti-constitution bullshiat home:

Late last month United States District Judge Alfred Covello issued a 47-page ruling calling Gov. Malloy's legislation constitutional, even though it imposed some restrictions on firearm owners.
"While the act burdens the plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights, it is substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control," Covello ruled

You could fertilize the Sahara with that much bullshiat.


He isn't the last word, and so what if your 2nd amendment rights are "burdened", you are not losing them and your constitutional right to own a gun is still there. It is as black and white as speeding. Follow the law or get caught and pay the penalty.

Just register the gun and show how law abiding gun owners are
 
2014-02-13 05:16:32 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Securitywyrm: TuteTibiImperes: The best course of action at this point would probably be a public awareness campaign combined with an extension of the registration time limits (with a fine for doing so late).  Run ads listing the characteristics of the weapons that fall under the law, let them know that they have until July 1st to register them and pay a minor fine with no criminal penalty, and that if they're caught with an unregistered weapon after that date they'll be charged with a felony.

Just register your dang guns people, the courts have been pretty clear that they're not going to let a law stand that allows the government to take them away.

That's the thing about the courts, they can change their mind. They change their mind a lot. Registration is always the first step towards confiscation.

Consider this: You register your gun. Then one year you have a really bad year and see your doctor about depression. The police then show up at your door and demand you turn over your guns, because they can access both the gun registration and your medical records. This pushes people who would otherwise seek medical attention to avoid it.

So you believe that people who are mentally ill should have firearms, no matter that the Supreme Court specifically said that they should not.


Mild depression? That's a mental illness, you may not have a gun.
Grandpa is living with you and has Alzheimers Disease? He has access to your guns, you may not have a gun.
Attention deficit disorder is also a "mental illness." Are you saying I shouldn't be able to have a gun? By the way, I served four years in the US Army. If I'm trusted with an M203 grenade launcher, I think I can be trusted with a 9mm.
 
2014-02-13 05:17:43 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Boojum2k: demaL-demaL-yeH: My whacky idea

No, that wasn't your whacky idea.
Whacky idea part 1, and I quote:
It's long past time for those bearing arms- which really is military service
Whacky idea part 2, quote again
I'm talking about reinstating the organized Militia.
We meet in the equivalent of the town square, drill, train, and qualify with our arms and ammunition, which are inspected.
Every person 16 legally present in the United States and over until death dost thou part participates to the fullest extent possible - participation mandatory and with real penalties attached for missing drill.
Alternative service is done by felons, the mentally ill, physically disabled, and conscientious objectors.
Everybody is screened, physically and mentally for fitness for duty, and must meet minimum standards.
You can own whatever firearms you qualify with, and you must keep them in proper repair and properly secured.
Crew-served weapons are stored at the armory.

http://www.fark.com/comments/8136924/Local-community-organizer-who-a dv ocated-passage-of-NY-SAFE-act-that-forbids-firearms-on-school-grounds- arrested-forwait-for-it

It's what the Swiss do.
It's what the Founders did.
It's what the Constitution specifically calls for.
There's nothing whacky about it.
It lets us cut the DoD budget and ensures that people of draft age are physically and mentally fit, and are competent with firearms.
What the fark is your problem with that?
Are you one of those entitlement types who believes that rights don't come with concomitant responsibilities?


Or my favorite proposal, the children and relatives of politicians are to be the first to be drafted.
 
2014-02-13 05:17:45 AM  

hardinparamedic: And it's just as likely that they used the Project Stargate psychics from the CIA to determine who had a gun and where to go to confiscate. My theory has just as much evidence as yours. The actual truth is they went door to door in many neighborhoods and either asked people if they had a gun, or kicked in the door to "abandoned" houses and took the gun.

If your suggestion is that they used the State CCP list to confiscate "guns", the overwhelming majority of which were not hand guns but long arms and shotguns, I'm going to need a little more than your pokey conspiracy theory to believe you.


In PA, they record every individual that purchases a gun and has to submit to a background check. Technically, they don't keep a list of gun owners, they simply keep track of everyone tries to legally purchase one. It would not surprise me if LA did the same thing.
 
2014-02-13 05:20:15 AM  

Piizzadude: so what if your 2nd amendment rights are "burdened", you are not losing them


They are, in fact, being infringed at that point.
 
2014-02-13 05:21:21 AM  

jso2897: Aigoo: A whole bunch of stuff I've heard before six million times and agree with 97% of.


Yes. I know all that - I don't need to hear any of it for the 800 th time.
This attitude of superior wisdom won't win you any friends either - it's not much more helpful than the "You're a sissy!" argument. Try approaching people as if they were other adults who you respect, and addressing their concerns. Most gun legislation is illogical and badly conceived - and with patience and respect, most reasonable people can be gotten to see it. That's why we have been winning this debate, up until recently, anyway.
But the adamant preaching, the insults, and in worst case scenarios, thinly veiled threats (you don't do this, that I have seen) - none of that stuff helps - not one little bit.

And yes, Boojum - I am dumb - you win.

 Idiots. Goodbye.


Don't act like a farking idiot and you don't have to be insulted. But when you come in here (as about 85% of Farkers tend to do on this topic) and call everyone  gun fappers without considering that even the most calm, rational discussions have seen people insulted and called gun lunatics, gun fappers and other assorted and much worse insults and you perpetuate that, what in the hell do you expect? It's Fark. I'm used to it. I just come out swinging now and then calm down if there's anyone reasonable about.

And hey--you are in fact deliberately being a dick (or you're drunk--in which case, you're forgiven because hey, it's Fark, and that's a normal state of being), because you couldn't be bothered to note the fact that I did apologize for being abrasive. So... quit being a butthurt self righteous douche.
 
2014-02-13 05:23:12 AM  

Boojum2k: Piizzadude: so what if your 2nd amendment rights are "burdened", you are not losing them

They are, in fact, being infringed at that point.


It does not say that the second amendment cannot come with terms and conditions, and if you say it does then everyone gets one. The nuts, the felons everyone.
 
2014-02-13 05:26:09 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: Given the circumstances at the time, the move made sense.


Just how the fark do you rationalize that??!?  Disarming the law abiding public absolutely ensures only the people that refused to register their guns (criminals) in a time of crisis are armed, while the police are completely overwhelmed and are unable to help you if anything happens helps society out precisely how??!?
 
2014-02-13 05:26:59 AM  

jso2897: Idiots. Goodbye.


You sure do fall back on name calling quite often, don't you?
 
2014-02-13 05:28:36 AM  

Farkage: TuteTibiImperes: Given the circumstances at the time, the move made sense.

Just how the fark do you rationalize that??!?  Disarming the law abiding public absolutely ensures only the people that refused to register their guns (criminals) in a time of crisis are armed, while the police are completely overwhelmed and are unable to help you if anything happens helps society out precisely how??!?


Dey not tankin' ur gunz, theys wants you to register dem. ani't noes disarmin' goin' on  less you cant foller da lawz.
 
2014-02-13 05:29:33 AM  

Piizzadude: It does not say that the second amendment cannot come with terms and conditions


And yet, as seen in the past, and now with California and New York (that story seems more credible given the lack of any rebuttal), government officials are pretty complacent about stepping across that fine line directly into infringement.

Therefore, the line must drawn further back to remove that opportunity from them.
 
2014-02-13 05:29:55 AM  

fusillade762: Pokey.Clyde: TuteTibiImperes: Just register your dang guns people,

Right. Because the government would never use something like a gun registry to go door-to-door to confiscate guns.

Oh, wait...

How did the police know where the guns were?


They went around door to door and asked. And since most people weren't doing anything wrong, they saw no reason to withhold the fact that they had firearms in their homes.
 
2014-02-13 05:31:33 AM  

kellyclan: fusillade762: Pokey.Clyde: TuteTibiImperes: Just register your dang guns people,

Right. Because the government would never use something like a gun registry to go door-to-door to confiscate guns.

Oh, wait...

How did the police know where the guns were?

They went around door to door and asked. And since most people weren't doing anything wrong, they saw no reason to withhold the fact that they had firearms in their homes.


And if they objected, they were beaten and hospitalized.
 
2014-02-13 05:32:05 AM  

Aigoo: And hey--you are in fact deliberately being a dick (or you're drunk--in which case, you're forgiven because hey, it's Fark, and that's a normal state of being), because you couldn't be bothered to note the fact that I did apologize for being abrasive. So... quit being a butthurt self righteous douche.


You can pretty much ignore anything jso says. S/he actually called me "a pussy little white boy from shiatville Texas" one time for some reason.
 
2014-02-13 05:32:45 AM  

Boojum2k: Piizzadude: It does not say that the second amendment cannot come with terms and conditions

And yet, as seen in the past, and now with California and New York (that story seems more credible given the lack of any rebuttal), government officials are pretty complacent about stepping across that fine line directly into infringement.

Therefore, the line must drawn further back to remove that opportunity from them.


All the way up to taking them from you, there is nothing wrong. When they say no one can have a gun anymore, I will be right there with you.

Registering, reasonable background checks, any type of safety (as long as it is easily released by the registered owner) are all ok. Advisable even.
 
2014-02-13 05:33:32 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Securitywyrm: TuteTibiImperes: The best course of action at this point would probably be a public awareness campaign combined with an extension of the registration time limits (with a fine for doing so late).  Run ads listing the characteristics of the weapons that fall under the law, let them know that they have until July 1st to register them and pay a minor fine with no criminal penalty, and that if they're caught with an unregistered weapon after that date they'll be charged with a felony.

Just register your dang guns people, the courts have been pretty clear that they're not going to let a law stand that allows the government to take them away.

That's the thing about the courts, they can change their mind. They change their mind a lot. Registration is always the first step towards confiscation.

Consider this: You register your gun. Then one year you have a really bad year and see your doctor about depression. The police then show up at your door and demand you turn over your guns, because they can access both the gun registration and your medical records. This pushes people who would otherwise seek medical attention to avoid it.

So you believe that people who are mentally ill should have firearms, no matter that the Supreme Court specifically said that they should not.


Way to twist around words.  Go have some coffee and come back when your reading comprehension improves.
 
2014-02-13 05:35:27 AM  

Aigoo: But for what it's worth, given the President's track record with drones, I don't give a damn what they're used for, I do not trust our government with drones on US soil for any reason whatsoever. So I support that call and would support it again. I'll personally go house to house before I'll trust a drone in Oklahoma skies. Talk about a guy who shouldn't have access to weapons. Jesus!


You do realize that the Civilian GlobalHawk models currently used by civilian letter agencies are completely incapable of carrying any kind of munitions,right?
 
2014-02-13 05:35:34 AM  

Piizzadude: All the way up to taking them from you, there is nothing wrong. When they say no one can have a gun anymore, I will be right there with you.


You're heading to New York to protest, I take it?
 
2014-02-13 05:36:02 AM  

Piizzadude: Dey not tankin' ur gunz, theys wants you to register dem. ani't noes disarmin' goin' on less you cant foller da lawz.


Actually, they were taking people's guns. That comment you responded to was talking about the cops and National Guard illegally confiscating firearms in New Orleans during/after Katrina.
 
2014-02-13 05:37:11 AM  

Pokey.Clyde: Actually, they were taking people's guns.


Don't worry, Piizzadude will be right there with you. Weather and schedule permitting, of course, and not if there's anything better to do.
 
2014-02-13 05:37:33 AM  

Pokey.Clyde: Aigoo: And hey--you are in fact deliberately being a dick (or you're drunk--in which case, you're forgiven because hey, it's Fark, and that's a normal state of being), because you couldn't be bothered to note the fact that I did apologize for being abrasive. So... quit being a butthurt self righteous douche.

You can pretty much ignore anything jso says. S/he actually called me "a pussy little white boy from shiatville Texas" one time for some reason.


Really? Well, that was a shiatty thing to say, and I apologize, and withdraw the remark.
At any rate - you guys win - I'll never attempt to advocate gun rights from my stuffy, academice perspective here again - I abandon the debate to those of you who believe it is best argued by impugning the other side's physical courage.
Good luck with that.
We're all counting on you.
 
2014-02-13 05:37:35 AM  

Boojum2k: And if they objected, they were beaten and hospitalized.


You know, I'm not defending the door to door searches and confiscations, but there is a good reason why weapons and firearms aren't allowed in shelters, right?

The later I have no problem with Law Enforcement securing, as long as they are given back to those people after the situation has ended. I've worked disaster housing shelters before. The emotion and anger in a lot of those people is not a place where you want firearms around.
 
Displayed 50 of 441 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 »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report