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.

(Click On Detroit)   Not news: Man breaks in to house. News: Woman in the home warns the man she has a gun and will shoot, and does, killing the man. FARK: This is the 8th time someone has broken in to their house   (clickondetroit.com) divider line 387
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

13849 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Mar 2014 at 7:36 PM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-03 04:00:49 AM

RatMaster999: RatMaster999: LavenderWolf: doglover: LavenderWolf: I'm not talking about history, I'm talking about right now.


Anytime you say you're not talking about history, you're not only wrong but also walking a well-trod path to failure. Advancement comes from knowledge, knowledge comes from experience, and experience from mistakes. You can skip making the mistakes yourself step by reading books. A few years of reading the right books and you might even realize why no one is swayed by online arguments in general or yours in particular.

You're not addressing anything I am saying at all. You diverted to tell me I didn't know history, and now you won't drop the subject. I know enough history to be on the same side of this issue as you, so why don't you step off the idiotic off-topic banter. Liberal people are not trying to take your guns. Shut the hell up, you Boy-who-cried-wolf fool, because when gun rights are actually under threat I would like to know. You're destroying the signal-to-noise ratio on threats to gun ownership.

Constantly crowing about people who want to take your guns when those people do not in fact want to take your guns has nothing to do with lessons learned from history. It is just paranoid delusion, plain and simple. You guys think *everything* is a sign that the gun grabbers are coming.

youarenothelping.jpg

/I support gun ownership 100%
//And people like you are the biggest problem with the gun owner image.
///Gun ownership is about guns, not your goddamn mouth.

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0241.htm

Nope, this isn't the first step in collecting guns from legitimate owners.


Oh, and this...

http://www.ct.gov/despp/lib/despp/slfu/firearms/despp-0788-c_magazin e_ declaration.pdf


Both of your links are just gibbering about the line where civilians are no longer allowed to have certain hardware. Some people think it should be with assault rifles (which, yes, are a thing and are real) being illegal, others think the line should be drawn farther up the chain of lethality, still others think no line need be drawn at all.

I'd agree that the "Assault weapons" ban is stupid - especially as is. This is not a "major thing" nor do I think it is leading to any kind of gun grabber fantasy Red Dawn scenario. Over the last few years, gun ownership in general has had obstacles reduced, not increased, and don't pretend otherwise. The weapons industry is enjoying a boom. What are you pretending for? We won. We are still winning.
 
2014-03-03 04:18:19 AM
LavenderWolf:
Both of your links are just gibbering about the line where civilians are no longer allowed to have certain hardware. Some people think it should be with assault rifles (which, yes, are a thing and are real) being illegal, others think the line should be drawn farther up the chain of lethality, still others think no line need be drawn at all.

I'd agree that the "Assault weapons" ban is stupid - especially as is. This is not a "major thing" nor do I think it is leading to any kind of gun grabber fantasy Red Dawn scenario. Over the last few years, gun ownership in general has had obstacles reduced, not increased, and don't pretend otherwise. The weapons industry is enjoying a boom. What are you pretending for? We won. We are still winning
...

And even though we've won - Heller, first President in years to remove carry restrictions (Obama), the rise of SYG aka "Kill the Witnesses" - fewer homes per capita have firearms.
 
2014-03-03 04:23:49 AM

anuran: LavenderWolf:
Both of your links are just gibbering about the line where civilians are no longer allowed to have certain hardware. Some people think it should be with assault rifles (which, yes, are a thing and are real) being illegal, others think the line should be drawn farther up the chain of lethality, still others think no line need be drawn at all.

I'd agree that the "Assault weapons" ban is stupid - especially as is. This is not a "major thing" nor do I think it is leading to any kind of gun grabber fantasy Red Dawn scenario. Over the last few years, gun ownership in general has had obstacles reduced, not increased, and don't pretend otherwise. The weapons industry is enjoying a boom. What are you pretending for? We won. We are still winning.  ...

And even though we've won - Heller, first President in years to remove carry restrictions (Obama), the rise of SYG aka "Kill the Witnesses" - fewer homes per capita have firearms.


Not everyone is interested in owning guns. I think the "omg they're grabbing our guns" crowd is partly to blame. They have a lot of people convinced that gun ownership involves a lot of bullshiat even though in most places in the US it's less legally complex than buying a used car.
 
2014-03-03 04:28:58 AM

LavenderWolf: You're not addressing anything I am saying at all.


Because it's not worth addressing. We're here to yell at each other and post dick jokes in between sessions of boredom at a dead end job. It's the internet.
 
2014-03-03 04:34:14 AM

doglover: LavenderWolf: You're not addressing anything I am saying at all.

Because it's not worth addressing. We're here to yell at each other and post dick jokes in between sessions of boredom at a dead end job. It's the internet.


Posting vague statements about your gun grabber boogeyman and how other people need to learn history before talking are not the actions of someone who wasn't trying to make a serious statement. You're just at the "Deny, distract, distance" point in the Red Dawn gun nut playbook.
 
2014-03-03 05:05:58 AM

caeroe: hardinparamedic: Livinglush: So where are these comparison reports? I would love to see them and I will gladly change my opinion.

[www.thetruthaboutguns.com image 850x637]

You might like it. I don't. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, either. And you can google the reports of the C9 Blowing up in people's hands if you want to read them.

I'll stick to my Walther/S&W

Almost always being ammo related and the shooter didn't catch the squib. You can punch an any model of firearm and find a horror story on Google. I saw a 1911 blow up for that reason, pics at least were on InGunOwners' site.  Also the last big recall on firearms was S&W, a big name out there.


Hipoints are ugly, and can bite your hand (if you got huge manbearpaws and hold it wrong), but they are reliable*, fairly accurate (mostly due to outdated simple blowback design) and they don't usually blow up.

Gun snobbery only serves gun manufacturers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbvvurXmAmg Intro to HP pistols (warning: mild racism/culturalism at the end)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FoWpog5KU4 Shenanigans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKkQm5TRaWE How to blow up a HiPoint C9

*as long as you get one of the 9/10 mags that actually works.
 
2014-03-03 05:10:05 AM

LavenderWolf: doglover: LavenderWolf: You're not addressing anything I am saying at all.

Because it's not worth addressing. We're here to yell at each other and post dick jokes in between sessions of boredom at a dead end job. It's the internet.

Posting vague statements about your gun grabber boogeyman and how other people need to learn history before talking are not the actions of someone who wasn't trying to make a serious statement. You're just at the "Deny, distract, distance" point in the Red Dawn gun nut playbook.


Do you like bananas?
 
2014-03-03 05:20:04 AM

doglover: LavenderWolf: doglover: LavenderWolf: You're not addressing anything I am saying at all.

Because it's not worth addressing. We're here to yell at each other and post dick jokes in between sessions of boredom at a dead end job. It's the internet.

Posting vague statements about your gun grabber boogeyman and how other people need to learn history before talking are not the actions of someone who wasn't trying to make a serious statement. You're just at the "Deny, distract, distance" point in the Red Dawn gun nut playbook.

Do you like bananas?


I'm not a big fan of most fruit, to be honest. I'm a meat and potatoes kind of guy. Veggies and such.
 
2014-03-03 05:37:18 AM
teenage mutant ninja rapist:

Bars on the windows is a good way to die in a fire. Especially in an arson prone town like detroit. Furthermore if you have the nerve to pull a home invasion on someone, and you get shot to death in the process fark you to you deserved it.

I remember living in a house with barred windows for a few years in my early teens. One day my younger sister came home from school with a homework assignment to work out a fire escape plan for the house, in which the usual entrance was blocked by flames. I don't know if she got credit for the assignment or not, because there was absolutely no other way out of the house (we didn't even have a back door.)
 
2014-03-03 05:51:04 AM

LavenderWolf: RatMaster999: RatMaster999: LavenderWolf: doglover: LavenderWolf: I'm not talking about history, I'm talking about right now.


Anytime you say you're not talking about history, you're not only wrong but also walking a well-trod path to failure. Advancement comes from knowledge, knowledge comes from experience, and experience from mistakes. You can skip making the mistakes yourself step by reading books. A few years of reading the right books and you might even realize why no one is swayed by online arguments in general or yours in particular.

You're not addressing anything I am saying at all. You diverted to tell me I didn't know history, and now you won't drop the subject. I know enough history to be on the same side of this issue as you, so why don't you step off the idiotic off-topic banter. Liberal people are not trying to take your guns. Shut the hell up, you Boy-who-cried-wolf fool, because when gun rights are actually under threat I would like to know. You're destroying the signal-to-noise ratio on threats to gun ownership.

Constantly crowing about people who want to take your guns when those people do not in fact want to take your guns has nothing to do with lessons learned from history. It is just paranoid delusion, plain and simple. You guys think *everything* is a sign that the gun grabbers are coming.

youarenothelping.jpg

/I support gun ownership 100%
//And people like you are the biggest problem with the gun owner image.
///Gun ownership is about guns, not your goddamn mouth.

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0241.htm

Nope, this isn't the first step in collecting guns from legitimate owners.


Oh, and this...

http://www.ct.gov/despp/lib/despp/slfu/firearms/despp-0788-c_magazin e_ declaration.pdf

Both of your links are just gibbering about the line where civilians are no longer allowed to have certain hardware. Some people think it should be with assault rifles (which, yes, are a thing and are real) being illegal, others think the line shoul ...


Except these are new regulations from Connecticut.  Less than a year old.  New York's banning magazines that hold more than a handful or rounds.  I think California is planning to try the same.  These asshats are still out there.
 
2014-03-03 06:17:23 AM

LavenderWolf: doglover: LavenderWolf: doglover: LavenderWolf: You're not addressing anything I am saying at all.

Because it's not worth addressing. We're here to yell at each other and post dick jokes in between sessions of boredom at a dead end job. It's the internet.

Posting vague statements about your gun grabber boogeyman and how other people need to learn history before talking are not the actions of someone who wasn't trying to make a serious statement. You're just at the "Deny, distract, distance" point in the Red Dawn gun nut playbook.

Do you like bananas?

I'm not a big fan of most fruit, to be honest. I'm a meat and potatoes kind of guy. Veggies and such.


i.huffpost.com

This is the only firearm I own. But I'm 100% against lawyers, lawmakers, and bans in general.

New York and California are how gun laws should not work. At the same time Pennsylvania and Florida are how labor laws shouldn't work. Then we've got North Carolina and Dakota showing us how civil rights shouldn't work. If we take the worst and best part of every single state of the union, we'll find laws are the problem and freedom the solution. Where's the best place for gays? California. Why? Less regulation. Where's the best place for guns? Texas. Why? Less regulation. The list goes on, but it's the goal to reduce it as much as possible.
 
2014-03-03 06:24:37 AM
One shot, dead!  At least she didn't waste any ammo.  That shiat's expensive any more.  She ought to sue his family to replace her $.30 caliber shell.
 
2014-03-03 07:39:33 AM

RatMaster999: Except these are new regulations from Connecticut. Less than a year old. New York's banning magazines that hold more than a handful or rounds. I think California is planning to try the same. These asshats are still out there.


Don't forget Colorado.  Though several congrescritters received a rude shock when they were recalled as a result of their vote.
 
2014-03-03 07:50:57 AM

a particular individual: One thing I've learned from this thread is thatconservatives have no idea how liberals in the real world feel about self-defense and responsible gun ownership. Here's a hint: We're not the stupid, pie-in-the-sky, la-di-dah caricatures Rush Limbaugh and Ted Nugent tell you we are.


That's hard to prove from fark gun threads.
 
2014-03-03 07:56:57 AM

Molavian: way south: /If kel-tec would get its act together, they'd be selling alot more sub-2000's in that catagory.

They're never going to get their act together.  I've given up on them as anything other than a novelty gun maker.  Hell, I got rid of my P3AT and bought an LCP because the fit and finish was so much better.  Dumped a P11, and have stopped looking for an RFB, PMR-30, or a KSG, not to mention the Sub-2000 I tried to pick up forever.


The subs popup on auction from time to time.  Its a much  better setup than the 995, but not worth the current markup.Kel-tec can't seem to expand fast enough and, to make it worse, they keep adding models.

What they should do (taboo as its been since the ACR farkup with magpul) is outsource production.
The sub in glock 17 has classic written all over it. Use the red lion front post as standard and maybe add a metal liner to the magwell, they'd dominate that market.
 
2014-03-03 07:59:23 AM

RatMaster999: aNihilV10L8tr: I do not own a firearm, but believe in the right to own one and do not think that right should be taken just because a few criminals ruin it for the rest of you. No one talks about taking everyone's knives when people get stabbed, no one talks about taking everyone's cars when someone gets run over. One thing in this thread has me a bit weary, all the posts dealing with how ugly a brand of gun is. Does your desire for weapons come from self-defense, or is it a fashion accessory? Are you trying to defend your property, or playing a game of dress up Barbie? I hope you feel safer because of a pretty gun, when I buy one it will be for function, not because it matches my shoes.

Does looks have anything to do with what car you drive?


Just because I can use it as a way to defend myself doesn't mean it can't also be viewed as a piece of art.


Nice point, I never looked at it that way. The reason i agree so heartily is because no one ever buys a car on looks alone, as some sort of status symbol, its always about the weighing the specific needs of the owner. One of the first gun rules is dont show it unless you plan to use it, so who cares if it is ugly if it hopefully stays holstered? Ask the robber trying to get your wallet if your gun is pretty while defending yourself?
If i want art, i will go to a museum.
 
2014-03-03 08:12:57 AM

Farkage: Lorelle: Penman: Lorelle: doglover: That would be a good idea to add to the home now, but having a gun would still be needful in a place like Detroit. And you don't spend 24/7 clutching the gun worried, the gun is just another tool, like a hammer. Only sometimes the nail that sticks up is a robber.

You're just being willfully ignorant about guns.

Funny, when the guy who broke into my apartment pointed his gun at me and told me not to scream (I screamed my head off, natch), I didn't view it as a mere "tool."

You made a  CHOICE not to defend yourself with force. What happens from that point on is your responsibility.

I defended myself with what I had on hand: a small pot of boiling chicken soup (I was standing at the stove in the kitchen when the break-in occurred). The guy yelled and ran out of my apartment.

gja: Oh group up you horses ass. You do not win this one, little miss 'no guns'.

F*ck off, asshole.

/see, I made a CHOICE to defend myself

So as long as everybody keeps a pot of boiling chicken soup next to them at all times, they're good to go until they save up the money to move.
Got it.


Until your landlady gets wise to your con for free rent and you have to go down on her

/lil roytoy
 
2014-03-03 08:22:06 AM

LavenderWolf: It's like... "Dude. Let's go to the range and then get drunk. You might realize how pro-firearm liberal people really are.


Pro-firearm for themselves and their security guards, that is. Anti-firearm for all other law abiding citizens, though.

/it's easy to be a fair-weather friend of the second amendment
//what matters is whether you still support the 2nd when reality isn't pretending to be a Hollywood buddy-cop action dramedy
 
2014-03-03 08:29:37 AM

Tatterdemalian: /it's easy to be a fair-weather friend of the second amendment


It's easy to be a fair-weather friend for most rights.
 
2014-03-03 08:40:46 AM

BayouOtter: caeroe: luniz5monody: There was another one similar to this just a few days ago...Detroit too. There's home security video of it, but this one involved 3 guys kicking in a back door and then running when the homeowner (also a woman) came out with a rifle.

Fortunately the three involved were caught, being that they shot at, but not hit (afaik). She had a rusted HiPoint carbine. They're ugly, and their handguns get a lot of crap online, but those rifles are well made. They're excellent home defense weapons imo, I want one myself for home and as a range toy.

NO.
HiPoint pistols and rifles are
A) Made of shiatty pot metal which will split, explode, and fail at the drop of a hat.
B) Are poorly made and will not fit you comfortably AT ALL
C) All use a strait-blowback operation so they are punishing to shoot.

I've seen used police trade-in and surplus Glocks for 300$, Ruger LCPs and such for 200-250$, buy one of those.


DO NOT BUY A GLOCK!

There are more accidental shootings with Glocks than anything else out there, because the Glock DOES NOT HAVE A SAFETY!!!  It's an extremely dangerous gun.

You're much better off with the Hi Point.  No, they don't explode.  They're safer than the Glock.  They're less ugly than the Glock.  And they have a lifetime warranty.
 
2014-03-03 09:02:13 AM

Lorelle: Farkage: Lorelle: Farkage: Lorelle: You'd think that the homeowner would get a clue after the first break-in and 1) put bars on the windows, or 2) move to a safer neighborhood.

Sure, because everybody has money...right??

Guns don't cost money??

Are you even attempting to suggest a gun is as expensive as moving???

Depends...you can get family and friends to help you move.


Are you serious? Or trolling. Moving requires more than a truck. You have to have sufficient income to buy a new home. You have to have employment lined up in the new location. And most black people are confined to Detroit and a precious few other cities in Michigan. Black people can't just up and move to Bloomfield Hills or Rochester Hills or even Warren and Eastpointe. A lot of realtors would not even sell to a black family attempting to move into those areas.
 
2014-03-03 09:04:18 AM

DarkVader: BayouOtter: caeroe: luniz5monody: There was another one similar to this just a few days ago...Detroit too. There's home security video of it, but this one involved 3 guys kicking in a back door and then running when the homeowner (also a woman) came out with a rifle.

Fortunately the three involved were caught, being that they shot at, but not hit (afaik). She had a rusted HiPoint carbine. They're ugly, and their handguns get a lot of crap online, but those rifles are well made. They're excellent home defense weapons imo, I want one myself for home and as a range toy.

NO.
HiPoint pistols and rifles are
A) Made of shiatty pot metal which will split, explode, and fail at the drop of a hat.
B) Are poorly made and will not fit you comfortably AT ALL
C) All use a strait-blowback operation so they are punishing to shoot.

I've seen used police trade-in and surplus Glocks for 300$, Ruger LCPs and such for 200-250$, buy one of those.

DO NOT BUY A GLOCK!

There are more accidental shootings with Glocks than anything else out there, because the Glock DOES NOT HAVE A SAFETY!!!  It's an extremely dangerous gun.


Gosh, you're stupid. A Glock has three safeties, a trigger, firing pin, and drop safety. It does not have a thumb safety, which means the operator has to keep his finger off the trigger until he's ready to fire. You know, what he should be doing in the first place - if he's stupid enough to be dragging his fingers all over the trigger, a manual safety is going to lull him into a false sense of safety thats going to set up a negligent discharge.

You're much better off with the Hi Point.  No, they don't explode.

Yes, they do. A straight blowback design coupled with a zinc-alloy slide means that a HiPoint has a lifespan of less than 10,000 rounds, maybe as little as 2,000, maybe as little as two. They are the definition of unreliable.

They're safer than the Glock.

If you demand a manual safety, there are dozens of other guns that have manual safeties.

They're less ugly than the Glock.  And they have a lifetime warranty.

I think Glocks are pretty homely, but dogshiat looks and works better than a HiPoint. I could shiat in a box and write a big ole LIFETIME WARRANTY on the shiat, and you'll still have a box of shiat.
 
2014-03-03 09:08:48 AM

DarkVader: There are more accidental shootings with Glocks than anything else out there, because the Glock DOES NOT HAVE A SAFETY!!! It's an extremely dangerous gun.


Part of this is observation bias.  Because there's so many police departments that issue them, there's probably more Glocks out there than other handguns.

And depending on who you ask, most will tell you that the Glock has at least 3 safeties.  That funky sub-trigger lever?  That's a safety.  There's a firing pin block in the system - that's another safety.

What it lacks is a manual safety, and for that to do anything you actually have to turn it on.
 
2014-03-03 09:11:32 AM

doglover: LavenderWolf: doglover: But guns are bad and are only used to shoot kids and have no legitimate place in society!

AngryDragon: Can't be.  Defensive firearm use is a Fark myth.  All firearms owners are just waiting for the opportunity to gun down an innocent child for some perceived slight.  This is irresponsible reporting.

The two of you need to read this guy's post.

a particular individual: One thing I've learned from this thread is that conservatives have no idea how liberals in the real world feel about self-defense and responsible gun ownership. Here's a hint: We're not the stupid, pie-in-the-sky, la-di-dah caricatures Rush Limbaugh and Ted Nugent tell you we are.

Because you guys reek of some kind of desperate desire to protect your guns from the nobody that's going to take them.

And you need to actually read a history book that wasn't written for the public school system.

Also, 48 Laws of Power. That's required reading to have a valid opinion in politics.


"Always make those above you feel comfortably superior."

That bootlicking crap is NOT necessary to have a valid opinion about anything, except perhaps the author.
 
2014-03-03 09:17:19 AM

a particular individual: One thing I've learned from this thread is thatconservatives have no idea how liberals in the real world feel about self-defense and responsible gun ownership. Here's a hint: We're not the stupid, pie-in-the-sky, la-di-dah caricatures Rush Limbaugh and Ted Nugent tell you we are.


Well, it is the 99% giving the 1% a bad name here Im afraid. When liberal leaders actually go on record to try and soothe the followers that regulation is only the first small step to confiscation you have to admit maybe gun owners have a right to be a little wary.
 
2014-03-03 09:17:37 AM

LavenderWolf: Democrats aren't trying, and haven't tried, to do anything major to gun ownership rights in my entire political memory.


I remember when I was 15. Good times.
 
2014-03-03 09:23:57 AM

RatMaster999: Except these are new regulations from Connecticut.  Less than a year old.  New York's banning magazines that hold more than a handful or rounds.  I think California is planning to try the same.  These asshats are still out there.


You're not listening to him. The Democrats have never tried to take your guns. The times they did don't count because as long as you can have a single-fire rifle, you technically can still have your guns. You're delusional for not being able to see how reasonable he is being.
 
2014-03-03 09:36:22 AM

Firethorn: DarkVader: There are more accidental shootings with Glocks than anything else out there, because the Glock DOES NOT HAVE A SAFETY!!! It's an extremely dangerous gun.

Part of this is observation bias.  Because there's so many police departments that issue them, there's probably more Glocks out there than other handguns.

And depending on who you ask, most will tell you that the Glock has at least 3 safeties.  That funky sub-trigger lever?  That's a safety.  There's a firing pin block in the system - that's another safety.

What it lacks is a manual safety, and for that to do anything you actually have to turn it on.


No, those features aren't safeties.

A firing pin block is a good thing, but won't do a damn thing if something catches the trigger.  It's nice if you drop the gun, though.  But it's not a safety, it's a firing pin block.  Do I think it should be mandatory on new gun designs, sure.  But it's not a safety.

And that funky sub-trigger?  Yeah, that's not a safety.  That's the trigger.  In no way does that make the gun even the slightest bit safer.  I see no reason for it to even be there.

A "manual safety" as you call it IS a safety.  Not turning it on is highly irresponsible behavior.  Owning a gun without one is irresponsible behavior.  And manufacturing or selling a gun without one should be illegal.
 
hej
2014-03-03 09:56:15 AM

filter: Why is it reported as fact that she warned him?


Why is it reported as fact that she shot him?
 
2014-03-03 10:20:49 AM

varmitydog: lonerancher: I'm sorry, but if you break into my home I am not giving a warning. I have no idea what your intentions are and I am not going to risk my life to find out. I'm not going to give up the advantage of surprise and give away my position. Once I identify the person as someone that has no reason to be in the house, they are getting shot. It doesn't matter if they are armed or not. Just because they don't have a gun in their hand doesn't mean they don't have one in their waste band. Hell they could grab a lamp or many other household items and swing those as a weapon. If you aren't willing to risk your life, you should not break into someone's home. It just shouldn't be that hard to wrap your head around.

I agree. If you shout something at them, several things can happen, and all of them except their turning around and leaving is not in your favor. The first is that if they are armed, you are now in an even-up shoot out instead of having the drop on them. The second is that they become a moving target, much harder to hit. Why would you give up your advantage of surprise? The first sound they hear should be the gun going off.

Of course, I'm a southern country boy and the very idea of someone trying to break into my house doesn't mean danger; it means "hot damn, I get to shoot somebody!!!" Anyways it will never happen, nobody can get close to my house without the dogs howling for ten minutes.


I think it's a good idea to yell a warning. When (not if) my teenaged son tries to sneak in after curfew, I'd rather give him the chance to identify himself.
 
2014-03-03 11:09:25 AM

umad: LavenderWolf: Democrats aren't trying, and haven't tried, to do anything major to gun ownership rights in my entire political memory.

I remember when I was 15. Good times.


A few highly unpopular local regulations don't really qualify "Something major the democrats were doing" where were the original goalposts set. I'm 27 now, been paying attention since Clinton's ruckus at the end of his presidency.

I've seen a lot of fanatical gun nuts preaching far and wide for at least the last decade, and I know from older news media that it's been going on much longer, about how they're coming to take our guns, yet, nothing has happened except that firearms are now easier to purchase in the vast majority of cases.

Congress couldn't even agree to tighten restrictions on felons and the mentally unstable.

Be vigilant, sure, but don't be paranoid and delusional.
 
2014-03-03 11:24:29 AM

Lorelle: You'd think that the homeowner would get a clue after the first break-in and 1) put bars on the windows, or 2) move to a safer neighborhood.


She should just give her landlord notice, or escrow her rent until the landlord installs bars. That is, unless she owns the house and can't sell, and she can just barely afford to pay the mortgage and heat the place. Either way, how stupid is she to live there, right?
 
2014-03-03 11:29:53 AM

gja: Lorelle: martid4: Lorelle: You'd think that the homeowner would get a clue after the first break-in and 1) put bars on the windows, or 2) move to a safer neighborhood.

I had to mark this as funny, it's so stupid it made me laugh.

Nah. What's stupid is wasting your life sitting around waiting to be attacked again.

Yesterday marked 29 years since someone broke into my apartment and threatened me with a gun. I moved to a safer neighborhood 2 months later, after my lease had expired.

Well whoopdyshiat for you. Last time I saw that much projection was the matinee of 'Gravity'.

You and mister "move to another place" must be screwing each other.


Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension, tard nugget!
 
2014-03-03 11:30:59 AM

a particular individual: One thing I've learned from this thread is thatconservatives have no idea how liberals in the real world feel about self-defense and responsible gun ownership. Here's a hint: We're not the stupid, pie-in-the-sky, la-di-dah caricatures Rush Limbaugh and Ted Nugent tell you we are.


I was going by what Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer tell us you're like.
 
2014-03-03 11:35:57 AM

DarkVader: Firethorn: DarkVader: There are more accidental shootings with Glocks than anything else out there, because the Glock DOES NOT HAVE A SAFETY!!! It's an extremely dangerous gun.

Part of this is observation bias.  Because there's so many police departments that issue them, there's probably more Glocks out there than other handguns.

And depending on who you ask, most will tell you that the Glock has at least 3 safeties.  That funky sub-trigger lever?  That's a safety.  There's a firing pin block in the system - that's another safety.

What it lacks is a manual safety, and for that to do anything you actually have to turn it on.

No, those features aren't safeties.

A firing pin block is a good thing, but won't do a damn thing if something catches the trigger.  It's nice if you drop the gun, though.  But it's not a safety, it's a firing pin block.  Do I think it should be mandatory on new gun designs, sure.  But it's not a safety.

And that funky sub-trigger?  Yeah, that's not a safety.  That's the trigger.  In no way does that make the gun even the slightest bit safer.  I see no reason for it to even be there.

A "manual safety" as you call it IS a safety.  Not turning it on is highly irresponsible behavior.  Owning a gun without one is irresponsible behavior.  And manufacturing or selling a gun without one should be illegal.


Booger hook off bang lever. It really is that simple.
It worked with revolvers - which don't have those silly little thumb levers.
One of the first things any decent gun safety course will tell you is "Never EVER rely on a mechanical safety to keep the gun from firing"
 
2014-03-03 11:42:14 AM

Lorelle: doglover: Lorelle: teenage mutant ninja rapist: doglover: Lorelle: You'd think that the homeowner would get a clue after the first break-in and 1) put bars on the windows, or 2) move to a safer neighborhood.

With what money?

Only two kinds of people live in Detroit anymore: those who want to move but can't afford it and those who want to move but really can't afford it.

Bars on the windows is a good way to die in a fire. Especially in an arson prone town like detroit. Furthermore if you have the nerve to pull a home invasion on someone, and you get shot to death in the process fark you to you deserved it.

One can buy quick-release window bars, dude.

For only a mere $1000's of dollars per home, and there's no other uses for them.

Meanwhile a gun is $100's and fills multiple roles in both defense, sport, and in rare cases track meets.

Then put security laminates on the windows. Cheaper than bars, and one can break the windows from the inside in case of fire.

It beats spending one's life clutching a gun 24/7, just waiting for the next break-in to occur.


You kill a couple of them and word gets around to leave you be, which is priceless.
 
2014-03-03 11:47:56 AM

Lorelle: doglover: That would be a good idea to add to the home now, but having a gun would still be needful in a place like Detroit. And you don't spend 24/7 clutching the gun worried, the gun is just another tool, like a hammer. Only sometimes the nail that sticks up is a robber.

You're just being willfully ignorant about guns.

Funny, when the guy who broke into my apartment pointed his gun at me and told me not to scream (I screamed my head off, natch), I didn't view it as a mere "tool."


Well, he guy who broke into her house wasn't a pussy like you; she pointed the weapon at him and he kept on trying to get in.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-03 11:56:54 AM

LavenderWolf: umad: LavenderWolf: Democrats aren't trying, and haven't tried, to do anything major to gun ownership rights in my entire political memory.

I remember when I was 15. Good times.

A few highly unpopular local regulations don't really qualify "Something major the democrats were doing" where were the original goalposts set. I'm 27 now, been paying attention since Clinton's ruckus at the end of his presidency.

I've seen a lot of fanatical gun nuts preaching far and wide for at least the last decade, and I know from older news media that it's been going on much longer, about how they're coming to take our guns, yet, nothing has happened except that firearms are now easier to purchase in the vast majority of cases.

Congress couldn't even agree to tighten restrictions on felons and the mentally unstable.

Be vigilant, sure, but don't be paranoid and delusional.



The first bolded part shows just how disingenuous you are.
The second bolded part is PART of the problem, young man. You haven't been around long enough to see all the nonsense.

Try some of these links:
Recent
The thing that started it all

There are MANY more. But that really isn't the point. The point is POLITICIANS are prone to gun confiscation whether it be overt or via an ex-post-facto rule change.
 
2014-03-03 11:58:12 AM
Hmm, lets compare legitimate self-protection shootings with murders, suicides, 4-year-olds shooting each other, and Bubba shooting his friend while "cleaning his gun" and see which one is the more frequent occurance.
 
2014-03-03 11:58:35 AM

AngryDragon: Can't be.  Defensive firearm use is a Fark myth.  All firearms owners are just waiting for the opportunity to gun down an innocent child for some perceived slight.  This is irresponsible reporting.


Statistics: how do they work?
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-03 11:58:44 AM

martid4: gja: Lorelle: martid4: Lorelle: You'd think that the homeowner would get a clue after the first break-in and 1) put bars on the windows, or 2) move to a safer neighborhood.

I had to mark this as funny, it's so stupid it made me laugh.

Nah. What's stupid is wasting your life sitting around waiting to be attacked again.

Yesterday marked 29 years since someone broke into my apartment and threatened me with a gun. I moved to a safer neighborhood 2 months later, after my lease had expired.

Well whoopdyshiat for you. Last time I saw that much projection was the matinee of 'Gravity'.

You and mister "move to another place" must be screwing each other.

Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension, tard nugget!


Grow up little one. Snarky comments are rife here. Get over yourself.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-03 12:07:28 PM

martid4: gja: Lorelle: martid4: Lorelle: You'd think that the homeowner would get a clue after the first break-in and 1) put bars on the windows, or 2) move to a safer neighborhood.

I had to mark this as funny, it's so stupid it made me laugh.

Nah. What's stupid is wasting your life sitting around waiting to be attacked again.

Yesterday marked 29 years since someone broke into my apartment and threatened me with a gun. I moved to a safer neighborhood 2 months later, after my lease had expired.

Well whoopdyshiat for you. Last time I saw that much projection was the matinee of 'Gravity'.

You and mister "move to another place" must be screwing each other.

Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension, tard nugget!


Wait a minute. I owe you an apology. L's multi-quote threw off the format. You rebutted her nonsense. I was not referencing you.
Sorry. I should have specified. Plus, you are not a dude. The person I was referencing IS.
 
2014-03-03 12:18:13 PM

LavenderWolf: umad: LavenderWolf: Democrats aren't trying, and haven't tried, to do anything major to gun ownership rights in my entire political memory.

I remember when I was 15. Good times.

A few highly unpopular local regulations don't really qualify "Something major the democrats were doing" where were the original goalposts set. I'm 27 now, been paying attention since Clinton's ruckus at the end of his presidency.

I've seen a lot of fanatical gun nuts preaching far and wide for at least the last decade, and I know from older news media that it's been going on much longer, about how they're coming to take our guns, yet, nothing has happened except that firearms are now easier to purchase in the vast majority of cases.

Congress couldn't even agree to tighten restrictions on felons and the mentally unstable.

Be vigilant, sure, but don't be paranoid and delusional.


What you're doing is called "back-pedaling" or moving goalposts.  You said they haven't been trying or that they have any interest in doing it.  Ask Diane Feinstein, or "The Mayors Against Illegal Guns".  Sure, none of the liberal/Democratic groups have been successful, but they sure as hell are trying.

Those "fanatical gun nuts" only preach those things because every time something happens they get on the news or start pushing bills that limit peoples' rights.  Its not the gun nuts that are causing the paranoia its Feintstein, Bloomburg, Eric Holder etc.
 
2014-03-03 12:24:07 PM

gja: Lorelle: Dimensio: gja: RottenEggs: twiztedjustin: Good for her.

Also, I only managed to ignore 1 person out of 85 comments. Fark, you're slipping.

The trolls are staying away from this one.

And yet, Lorelle is here trollin hard and long.

Lorelle is not "trolling". She is sincerely outraged that a citizen legally possessed a firearm and, even more offensive to her moral beliefs, that the citizen legally used the firearm in a defensive fashion.

STOP TRYING TO SPOIL MY FUN, DAMNIT.

gja: Lorelle: And, as I mentioned above, I didn't flee (I couldn't--there was no way I could get to the door without going past him

What? No windows?

It was a studio apartment with one door and one big, long window in front. The kitchenette and bathroom were in the rear.

I am enjoying this repartee immensely. It is like spit-roasting bugs on wire getting your ante up.
Too cold and out of season for fishing near me, so playing you like a trout on the end of a line will have to suffice.

BTW, if the bathroom was handy you might have tried flushing yourself. Or hiding in the shower and stopped breathing to trick him.
Of course the latter might have backfired if he was a necrophiliac.


That chick has a reputation for trolling gun threads. You stupidly fell for her shtick. Anyone can see that she played YOU, and I'll grudgingly admit that she did a pretty good job of it too. It's people like you who make gun advocates look like idiots.
 
2014-03-03 12:25:30 PM

anuran:
One of the first things any decent gun safety course will tell you is "Never EVER rely on a mechanical safety to keep the gun from firing"


My gun is designed to do only two things: fire when the trigger is pulled, and not fire when the trigger is not pulled. Every mod and attachment is dedicated to enhancing the reliability of these two functions, and any "safety" that prevents it from firing when the trigger is pulled is just as carefully avoided as attachments that could allow it to fire when the trigger is not pulled.

/really, it's not that farking hard to simply NOT PULL THE TRIGGER
//and if I pull the trigger, I am in fact capable of taking full personal responsibility for any reprecussions
///though given our country's current leadership, it's easy to see why any expectation of "personal responsibility" would normally result in disappointment
 
2014-03-03 12:27:43 PM

LavenderWolf: umad: LavenderWolf: Democrats aren't trying, and haven't tried, to do anything major to gun ownership rights in my entire political memory.

I remember when I was 15. Good times.

A few highly unpopular local regulations don't really qualify "Something major the democrats were doing" where were the original goalposts set. I'm 27 now, been paying attention since Clinton's ruckus at the end of his presidency.

I've seen a lot of fanatical gun nuts preaching far and wide for at least the last decade, and I know from older news media that it's been going on much longer, about how they're coming to take our guns, yet, nothing has happened except that firearms are now easier to purchase in the vast majority of cases.

Congress couldn't even agree to tighten restrictions on felons and the mentally unstable.

Be vigilant, sure, but don't be paranoid and delusional.


In New York State a deadly weapon of war that is too deadly to own:
upload.wikimedia.org

In New York State a perfectly legal non-weapon of war:
cdn2.armslist.com

These laws are totally about public safety.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-03 12:32:47 PM

Skeezix: gja: Lorelle: Dimensio: gja: RottenEggs: twiztedjustin: Good for her.

Also, I only managed to ignore 1 person out of 85 comments. Fark, you're slipping.

The trolls are staying away from this one.

And yet, Lorelle is here trollin hard and long.

Lorelle is not "trolling". She is sincerely outraged that a citizen legally possessed a firearm and, even more offensive to her moral beliefs, that the citizen legally used the firearm in a defensive fashion.

STOP TRYING TO SPOIL MY FUN, DAMNIT.

gja: Lorelle: And, as I mentioned above, I didn't flee (I couldn't--there was no way I could get to the door without going past him

What? No windows?

It was a studio apartment with one door and one big, long window in front. The kitchenette and bathroom were in the rear.

I am enjoying this repartee immensely. It is like spit-roasting bugs on wire getting your ante up.
Too cold and out of season for fishing near me, so playing you like a trout on the end of a line will have to suffice
.

BTW, if the bathroom was handy you might have tried flushing yourself. Or hiding in the shower and stopped breathing to trick him.
Of course the latter might have backfired if he was a necrophiliac.

That chick has a reputation for trolling gun threads. You stupidly fell for her shtick. Anyone can see that she played YOU, and I'll grudgingly admit that she did a pretty good job of it too. It's people like you who make gun advocates look like idiots.


Soooo, you missed my re-trolling of her? Bolded it for ya. Learn to laugh a bit. Have fun with life.

"It's people like you who make gun advocates look like idiots."
I don't give an damn what people think.
 
2014-03-03 12:42:12 PM

gja: Skeezix: gja: Lorelle: Dimensio: gja: RottenEggs: twiztedjustin: Good for her.

Also, I only managed to ignore 1 person out of 85 comments. Fark, you're slipping.

The trolls are staying away from this one.

And yet, Lorelle is here trollin hard and long.

Lorelle is not "trolling". She is sincerely outraged that a citizen legally possessed a firearm and, even more offensive to her moral beliefs, that the citizen legally used the firearm in a defensive fashion.

STOP TRYING TO SPOIL MY FUN, DAMNIT.

gja: Lorelle: And, as I mentioned above, I didn't flee (I couldn't--there was no way I could get to the door without going past him

What? No windows?

It was a studio apartment with one door and one big, long window in front. The kitchenette and bathroom were in the rear.

I am enjoying this repartee immensely. It is like spit-roasting bugs on wire getting your ante up.
Too cold and out of season for fishing near me, so playing you like a trout on the end of a line will have to suffice.

BTW, if the bathroom was handy you might have tried flushing yourself. Or hiding in the shower and stopped breathing to trick him.
Of course the latter might have backfired if he was a necrophiliac.

That chick has a reputation for trolling gun threads. You stupidly fell for her shtick. Anyone can see that she played YOU, and I'll grudgingly admit that she did a pretty good job of it too. It's people like you who make gun advocates look like idiots.

Soooo, you missed my re-trolling of her? Bolded it for ya. Learn to laugh a bit. Have fun with life.

"It's people like you who make gun advocates look like idiots."
I don't give an damn what people think.


I'm laughing, but at YOU. I've seen enough of her shiat to know how she works. She always waits until someone like you gets unhinged and starts calling her names, then she lays the smackdown on them and goes off to troll another thread.

Don't feed the troll. You only end up making yourself look like a fool.
 
2014-03-03 12:42:44 PM

Nix Nightbird: As for government in Detroit, the people who run for office there aren't Republicans OR Democrats; They're just plain corrupt.


"No True Scotsman" fallacy.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-03 12:45:20 PM

Skeezix: gja: Skeezix: gja: Lorelle: Dimensio: gja: RottenEggs: twiztedjustin: Good for her.

Also, I only managed to ignore 1 person out of 85 comments. Fark, you're slipping.

The trolls are staying away from this one.

And yet, Lorelle is here trollin hard and long.

Lorelle is not "trolling". She is sincerely outraged that a citizen legally possessed a firearm and, even more offensive to her moral beliefs, that the citizen legally used the firearm in a defensive fashion.

STOP TRYING TO SPOIL MY FUN, DAMNIT.

gja: Lorelle: And, as I mentioned above, I didn't flee (I couldn't--there was no way I could get to the door without going past him

What? No windows?

It was a studio apartment with one door and one big, long window in front. The kitchenette and bathroom were in the rear.

I am enjoying this repartee immensely. It is like spit-roasting bugs on wire getting your ante up.
Too cold and out of season for fishing near me, so playing you like a trout on the end of a line will have to suffice.

BTW, if the bathroom was handy you might have tried flushing yourself. Or hiding in the shower and stopped breathing to trick him.
Of course the latter might have backfired if he was a necrophiliac.

That chick has a reputation for trolling gun threads. You stupidly fell for her shtick. Anyone can see that she played YOU, and I'll grudgingly admit that she did a pretty good job of it too. It's people like you who make gun advocates look like idiots.

Soooo, you missed my re-trolling of her? Bolded it for ya. Learn to laugh a bit. Have fun with life.

"It's people like you who make gun advocates look like idiots."
I don't give an damn what people think.

I'm laughing, but at YOU. I've seen enough of her shiat to know how she works. She always waits until someone like you gets unhinged and starts calling her names, then she lays the smackdown on them and goes off to troll another thread.

Don't feed the troll. You only end up making yourself look like a fool.


Not a concern here. Most who know me know I was playing here just to get a rise out of her. It worked.
I got her to curse at me. I enjoyed that. My guilty pleasure is torturing feeble-minded fools who think they can match wits.
A character flaw, I admit, but my NY-ism comes through at times.
 
Displayed 50 of 387 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report