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.

(CNN)   Good news: if you sold an assault rifle in the past year then you made a nice profit. Bad news: if you bought an assault rifle in the past year then you're a sucker   (money.cnn.com) divider line 71
    More: Obvious, assault weapons, Wedbush Securities, assault rifles, Sandy Hook, Thunder, Falls Church  
•       •       •

9750 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Apr 2014 at 3:13 PM (15 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-04-09 01:50:50 PM
7 votes:
A guy at my local food co-op told me that people are modifying automatic AR-47 assault rifles so they can shoot two 40-caliper clips of hollow-point shotgun shells at the same time.

Do we, as a people, really need weapons that are this needlessly destructive?
2014-04-09 03:14:15 PM
6 votes:
dittybopper:

Unless, of course, subby means "assault weapons", which is a nebulous category that seems to basically mean "scary looking guns".  They are not the same thing as "assault rifles", which are by definition machine guns.

Subby here.  I contemplated using "clips" just to see if you'd have a seizure.
2014-04-09 02:13:21 PM
4 votes:
You mean gun nuts are gullible morons? I have to sit down for this.
2014-04-09 03:30:25 PM
3 votes:
www.gunnuts.net
2014-04-09 03:20:12 PM
3 votes:
img.fark.net
2014-04-09 02:14:44 PM
3 votes:
My wife told me I seemed to love my guns more than my family. I told her that wasn't true. Little Timmy isn't going to college because it is full of liberals, not because I cashed out the college fund to buy another AR-15.
2014-04-09 07:59:52 PM
2 votes:
They're not assault rifles, they're automatic machine guns. Words mean whatever anti-firearm advocates say they mean. If you try to contest that, you're in violation of point #derp on that idiot's chart of masturbatory stupidity he posts in almost every thread.

Get it yet, guntardos?
2014-04-09 05:34:39 PM
2 votes:

JesseL: CynicalLA: The only people talking about banning guns are idiot gun nuts.  You guys are delusional.  It's like you are fighting your own paranoia.

"A gun-control movement worthy of the name would insist that President Clinton move beyond his proposals for controls ... and immediately call on Congress to pass far-reaching industry regulation like the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act ... [which] would give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns."
Josh Sugarmann (executive director of the Violence Policy Center)

"My view of guns is simple. I hate guns and I cannot imagine why anyone would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned."
Deborah Prothrow-Stith (Dean of Harvard School of Public Health)

"I don't care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say 'Sorry.' it's 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison."
Rosie O'Donnell (At about the time she said this, Rosie engaged the services of a bodyguard who applied for a gun permit.)

"Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option - keep your gun but permit it."
Andrew Cuomo

"I do not believe in people owning guns. Guns should be owned only by [the] police and military. I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state."
Michael Dukakis

"If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all."
U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman

"In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea ... Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic - purely symbolic - move in that directio ...


Man, you're really paranoid to make all that up.
2014-04-09 05:07:54 PM
2 votes:
CynicalLA: gun nuts, cowards, retards, pu**ies, nuts...

Don't strain your vocabulary too much, now.

After all, if the only home defense you have is your rapier wit, you might need to conserve ammo.
2014-04-09 04:45:19 PM
2 votes:

Carn: Australia doesn't have the number of guns in circulation that we do


Not anymore they don't.
2014-04-09 04:44:13 PM
2 votes:
gravy chugging cretin.: Are you intimidated yet?

img.fark.net

of the patriotic gimp? Slightly.
2014-04-09 04:31:00 PM
2 votes:
When you say:

Farking Canuck: The real question is "Who cares?". Everyone is discussing the same thing ... gun nuts are just trying to use semantics to discredit opinions that have nothing to do with the minutia of gun terminology.


I hear: "All private gun ownership should be outlawed because violence."
2014-04-09 04:23:29 PM
2 votes:
So for as little as $375 dollars I can buy an assult rifle and then be assured that I will meet Obama when he comes to take it from me?

That sounds like a bargain, meeting him otherwise would involve airfare, hotels, lucky timing, and maybe even a large campaign donation. I would literaly be saving thousands.
2014-04-09 03:42:56 PM
2 votes:

stonicus: You sound like a child molester arguing over what exactly the word "consent" means.


Nice ad hominem.

You sound like a prosecutor trying to convict someone of a sex crime because they took a piss in an alley behind a dumpster.
2014-04-09 03:32:30 PM
2 votes:

sigdiamond2000: A guy at my local food co-op told me that people are modifying automatic AR-47 assault rifles so they can shoot two 40-caliper clips of hollow-point shotgun shells at the same time.


My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.

/I don't get my weapons news at the farmers market.
//The produce is really fresh though.
2014-04-09 03:32:04 PM
2 votes:

dittybopper: Actual Farking: It will never happen, but I think the gun debate would be advanced massively if everyone could have a list of agreed upon nomenclature to work from.

*YES*.

SO VERY MUCH FARKING *THIS*.

The problem is that the people who hate guns the most know absolutely nothing about them.  This is perfectly encapsulated by Carolyn McCarthy whose signature issue was gun control (her husband was killed, and son wounded, in the Long Island Railroad massacre), who, when pressed about an assault weapons ban she introduced into Congress, couldn't define what a "barrel shroud" was, despite it being in the bill that she introduced, and ended up mistakenly calling it the "shoulder thing that goes up".

She literally didn't know the difference between a piece of sheet metal that surrounds the barrel of a gun, and a folding stock.

BTW, I don't know why it's OK to have a piece of walnut surrounding a barrel, but not a piece of steel.  Doesn't seem to be a rational difference to me, but then, I generally know what I'm talking about when it comes to firearms.


You shouldn't get too wound up about it. Liberal Progressives live in fear of of guns and people with guns. They don't understand the hobby and would rather, for the most part, would do away with anyone being able to  own anything might be used to harm another.

You can't blame them though, they have been trained since youth to fear things that they don't understand and are soft minded enough to think that anything for "the greater good" is acceptable and right. This is especially true if you can find some reason to form a new gov't agency to regulate anything that they have an issue with. Being good sheep is about being part of the collective, and they certainly don't want to be seen as bad sheep by their Central Planning handlers.
2014-04-09 03:27:31 PM
2 votes:
And I was going to retire from the t-shirt and coffee mug profits.

image16.spreadshirt.com
2014-04-09 03:21:29 PM
2 votes:
Is this the thread where everyone insists they didn't get ripped off and whines about what a good investment their gun was and how many times they've already fended off hoards of intruders with it?
2014-04-09 02:26:12 PM
2 votes:

James!: Don't waste your time getting into a semantic argument over gun words.


Rule #4, it's one of their most powerful tricks to making you think they have a point

img.fark.net
2014-04-09 02:02:17 PM
2 votes:

Jackson Herring: James!: The gun market is probably the most easily manipulated market ever.

my ten year old cousin told me the other day that obama is going take away all my guns

this is not a joke


Did he then try to sell you a gun?

"You better buy this pop gun, Uncle Herring.  Obama's going to ban them pretty soon!  Only $500!"
2014-04-09 01:51:26 PM
2 votes:
ooh, but at least you got your "man card" reissue for the penii-impaired
img.fark.net
2014-04-10 01:00:58 PM
1 votes:

redmid17: "First shot's a warning"


That is so 2009.  The new sticker is this:

sphotos-d.ak.fbcdn.net
2014-04-10 03:11:02 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: So you tell Colt they can't make so many guns anymore.


Colt hasn't made revolvers in a long time.

Doom MD: Now the mask comes off. So you want the USA to be like Venezuela and forcibly nationalize an entire industry? To deny people their rights? Do you have any idea what a misguided child you sound like right now? This is so unrealistic it's hilarious.


He's offering up a compromise!  He's not some lunatic who wants to take all of your guns, he just wants to nationalize gun manufacturers so they can't sell you any.  If we don't listen to his voice of reason then the gun grabbers will enact gun control that you won't like because you won't agree to gun control that you don't like.
2014-04-10 03:08:56 AM
1 votes:

dropdfun: ox45tallboy: Doom MD: So I turn in the colt for a 125 dollar profit. Then I can buy another one and do the same. This will totally exhaust the gun supply since colt stopped making guns so long ago.

I'm really failing to see how this actually helps anything.

So you tell Colt they can't make so many guns anymore. Or. you buy them out with taxpayer money and you convert the part of their factory that doesn't make guns for the military into making something else the government needs a lot of. Everyone keeps their job, the shareholders get happy, everyone's happy.

LOL is this guy for real?


I know, I hope it's a troll because i seriously couldn't handle someone having this argument with me in real life. It's just laughable.
2014-04-10 03:06:42 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: Doom MD: So I turn in the colt for a 125 dollar profit. Then I can buy another one and do the same. This will totally exhaust the gun supply since colt stopped making guns so long ago.

I'm really failing to see how this actually helps anything.

So you tell Colt they can't make so many guns anymore. Or. you buy them out with taxpayer money and you convert the part of their factory that doesn't make guns for the military into making something else the government needs a lot of. Everyone keeps their job, the shareholders get happy, everyone's happy.


LOL is this guy for real?
2014-04-10 03:00:24 AM
1 votes:

Doom MD: So I turn in the colt for a 125 dollar profit. Then I can buy another one and do the same. This will totally exhaust the gun supply since colt stopped making guns so long ago.

I'm really failing to see how this actually helps anything.


So you tell Colt they can't make so many guns anymore. Or. you buy them out with taxpayer money and you convert the part of their factory that doesn't make guns for the military into making something else the government needs a lot of. Everyone keeps their job, the shareholders get happy, everyone's happy.
2014-04-10 02:27:51 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: You're saying that no one will sell a crappy handgun for $100?


Not somebody who uses crappy, $100 handguns....

AR-15's repurchased will bring more money than $400. Crappy Saturday night specials and old 1950's era rusted-up 20-gauge shotguns will bring less. If, as you said, the vast majority of AR-15 owners love love love their guns, they probably wouldn't sell them back to the government at any price - thereby proving my point for me, so thanks for that. The vast majority of guns purchased would be of the crappy variety, and $400 is not an unreasonable estimate for the average price of all the firearms repurchased.

Let's read the rest of what you posted.  Shockingly, it got stupider.

At an liberal (heh!) estimate of $400 per gun, we can get rid of 10 million guns for the low, low price of 4 billion dollars.

10 million guns that are likely barely functioning and statistically unlikely to be used in a crime.  And if your hope is to get crime guns off of the street, I pity your thinking.  The average criminal is not going to dispose of evidence by handing it over to the police, it's going to end up at the bottom of a large body of water or buried in the desert.  They're not going to dispose of a tool of their trade for less than the utility it brings to them.  The average street hood with a $100 Raven won't turn it in for $110, not when they can use it to bump off rival drug dealers or knock over a liquor store.

This is only about 3 1/2% of the number of guns currently in the country, but they're the most important ones to take off the streets.

See above.

Most of the guns will come from gun shops,

How do you figure?

which means they will have lots of inventory room to buy more guns from people.

If these are guns nobody wants what are gun shops doing with them in the first place?

This is a good thing for taking guns off the streets,

I thought we were talking about gun dealers/FFLs

since FFL dealers

OK, now you are, four words ago you were talking about taking guns off the streets.

are not only heavily regulated, but also go to great pains to secure the guns they own.

But you just said that we need to get these guns out of their shops to keep them off the streets...

The remainder of the guns will come almost exclusively from poor people who need the money.

But who had enough money for a gun in the first place...

These are the people who are more likely to turn to crime due to poverty, and they also are less likely to keep their guns secure because they don't have the money for a safe, and they live in poor neighborhoods where burglary is more common.

If the GOP was anti-gun, this is what they would sound like.
2014-04-10 01:43:32 AM
1 votes:

Doom MD: It's cute he thinks the average gun is 400 dollars.


There was a columnist for WaPo, Matt Miller, who wrote an embarrassingly stupid editorial in the wake of Newtown, where he held up Australia's "buyback" (without referring to it as what it really was, a confiscation) as a model, and then threw out the lowball of $500 per gun, which would magically make America's streets safer because we would somehow turn in the same amount of guns as Australians were severely overestimated to have turned in.  The disarmament advocates quickly fell in line and began parroting this nonsense, although they smartly have stopped referencing Australia's confiscation program (for the most part).
2014-04-10 01:17:46 AM
1 votes:

sugar_fetus: It would take decades, or longer for the supply of 'assault weapons' to dry up in the US - more time than everyone here alive has.


I think you missed something in what I said:

ox45tallboy: Couple this with a buyback program, and tons of people will willingly give up their guns in exchange for money.


Put up a gun buyback program offering market value plus, say 10% on guns. There are plenty of people who will take this, especially those that bought up all of the guns that the NRA claimed Obama was about to ban. Of course there will be tons of people who will refuse on general principle, but there will be tons of others, especially gun shops, who will cash in on this deal to get rid of old inventory.

At an liberal (heh!) estimate of $400 per gun, we can get rid of 10 million guns for the low, low price of 4 billion dollars. This is only about 3 1/2% of the number of guns currently in the country, but they're the most important ones to take off the streets. Most of the guns will come from gun shops, which means they will have lots of inventory room to buy more guns from people. This is a good thing for taking guns off the streets, since FFL dealers are not only heavily regulated, but also go to great pains to secure the guns they own.

The remainder of the guns will come almost exclusively from poor people who need the money. These are the people who are more likely to turn to crime due to poverty, and they also are less likely to keep their guns secure because they don't have the money for a safe, and they live in poor neighborhoods where burglary is more common.

The beauty of this is that everything is strictly voluntary. No one gets forced to give up their guns. Attrition brings the numbers down to something reasonable (i.e., less than the almost one gun per man, woman, and child we have now).

sugar_fetus: If it's 'too dangerous' to sell, it's too dangerous to own. Period. People advocating 'banning but grandfathering' are beingintellectual dishonest and actually advocate banning and confiscation,. as long as the confiscation takesplace after the original owner is dead. It's theepitome of "I got mine - fsck you!"


That argument bears no weight with regards to what I am advocating. People are free to bequeath their firearms, or sell them to other mentally stable individuals without criminal records. Nothing mandatory at all.

sugar_fetus: Not much of a difference in the long run, and I'm looking out for not just our rights, butour posterity. I will not trade my future descendants rights away.


I hear this rhetoric all the time. I'm a gun owner, and this offends me deeply. The dudes who built this country started it with the Declaration of Independence, in which the inherent rights endowed by the Creator were listed with "life" being first and foremost. They didn't get around to listing "the right to keep and bear arms" until after the Constitution had already been signed and approved!

It's not that people shouldn't have a right to defend themselves, it's that the proliferation of ridiculous amounts of guns due to rampant market manipulation by such people as the industry trade group National Rifle Association is starting to affect people's lives. People that get killed by guns don't have any 2nd Amendment rights anymore, because even if you stick a gun in their coffin, they're not likely to keep and bear it. They'll just kind of lie there and ignore it. Why isn't anyone thinking about the 2nd Amendment rights of gun victims, instead of only their own?

Let's reduce the number of guns, and work on getting them out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unstable, in order to protect the right to Life. Then we'll work on Liberty and the Purfuit of Happinefs. If gun advocates don't start proposing their own ideas of how to reduce gun violence, they'll soon be left out of the discussion while the majority, non-gun-owning population does something about the problem.
2014-04-09 11:39:42 PM
1 votes:

tripleseven: USP .45: tripleseven: The program referenced in your article wasfrom 2006. Godammed obama and his time machine again.

Obama isn't the president and has no control over the DoD. This shiat is crazy. He can Executive Order some birth control, but can't stop the flow of MRAPs. Must be a difficult job to be the president and not the president at the same time.

What have you done to elect representation that will solve this problem?


Vote for the least authoritarian candidates I can find with my one vote, and biatch on the internet with futility regarding these issues.
2014-04-09 08:47:19 PM
1 votes:

Almost Everybody Poops: *Sees headline*

*Sees number of comments*

50% of these are  dittybopper's, right?

*scans thread*

*closes thread*


Well, 17 comments out of 400+, but that's pretty close to 50%. Right? 45%, at least.
2014-04-09 08:18:50 PM
1 votes:

James!: The gun market is probably the most easily manipulated market ever.


So much this.  The Gun Companies get people scared that they are going to loose their guns and people drive up the demand and the price (and profits) follow!

WHo would have thought that Gun Owners were driven by fear!
2014-04-09 08:17:59 PM
1 votes:
*Sees headline*

*Sees number of comments*

50% of these are  dittybopper's, right?

*scans thread*

*closes thread*
2014-04-09 07:08:16 PM
1 votes:

ultraholland: tripleseven: USP .45: tripleseven: Wow...I never once stated that a barrel shroud allows for rapid fire. Not once

Nope. Lie.

http://www.fark.com/comments/8204977/90095757#c90095757

 tripleseven: I said a barrel shroud assists the user in handling a gun that's barrel is hot due to rapid fire.

Nope. Lie. That's what said. It's a marginal benefit not prohibiting or enabling slow/rapid fire.

http://www.fark.com/comments/8204977/90095435#c90095435

You really need to go back and...read.

tripleseven is right. He never said any of that. If you're going to get pedantic about weapon definitions, it helps to be just as careful parsing other folks' words. That said, I want you, tripleseven, to cut through the bullshiat and explicitly state what your previous posts imply.


You seem rational, so here's my rational reply.

The other night, during the Ft Hood shooting thread, multiple people brought up the Diane Feinstein story.  The basis of their ridicule was that barrel shrouds only made guns "Look Scary" and therefore such as.  Someone even asked what about a barrel shroud is so bad.  I made the rational argument that from a purely legal and legislative point, the argument could be made that a barrel shroud assists the user in handling, and effectively firing a gun that's barrel had been made hot, likely by rapid fire.
That was it.  That's was my retort their question.
I then sat through the usual blah blah blah, you don't know guns, etc.  To which I replied, well, in fact, I know a bit about guns.  By no means an expert, but I sat through yearly gun safety courses, and fired quite a few rounds in the course of target shooting, shooting for competition, and hunting.  I no longer choose to shoot guns, or own them, but I have no problem with hunting.
I reiterated my experience with guns today to another poster.  I apparently made the mistake of stating "My father's idea of bonding with his sons, was going shooting"  This was only said to vaguely quantify the amount of time I had spent around guns. However, according to fark logic, and our many resident psychiatrists, this means I have "DADDY ISSUES!"  It also means, I am still IN NO WAY QUALIFIED to have an opinion on gun control, because I do not eat, sleep and breathe them.

I hope I've come clear?
2014-04-09 06:05:59 PM
1 votes:

clarksvegas: Here's the logic shark jump I like to make. What if that cop had not used a gun, and say an ax or butcher knife.


My understanding is that usually cops use stairs when a gun isn't handy.
2014-04-09 05:46:50 PM
1 votes:

impaler: Correct, the collection of all the "ban guns" type rhetoric is so small, 40 years of it can fit in one post in an Internet thread.


So you actually think that is the entire collection of these?  Are you that dumb or do you just play that way on Fark?
2014-04-09 05:36:22 PM
1 votes:

CynicalLA: Like I said, paranoid. They are coming to take your guns. You better stock up.


Now that's funny.  Better.


quotes:  "We're coming to take your guns"

LA:  "Hahah, you're paranoid to think they're coming to take your guns"


Keep it up.  Entertain me, monkey.
2014-04-09 05:31:09 PM
1 votes:
My AR has yet to assault anyone. Must be broken.
2014-04-09 05:29:33 PM
1 votes:

JesseL: CynicalLA: The only people talking about banning guns are idiot gun nuts.  You guys are delusional.  It's like you are fighting your own paranoia.

"A gun-control movement worthy of the name would insist that President Clinton move beyond his proposals for controls ... and immediately call on Congress to pass far-reaching industry regulation like the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act ... [which] would give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns."
Josh Sugarmann (executive director of the Violence Policy Center)

"My view of guns is simple. I hate guns and I cannot imagine why anyone would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned."
Deborah Prothrow-Stith (Dean of Harvard School of Public Health)

"I don't care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say 'Sorry.' it's 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison."
Rosie O'Donnell (At about the time she said this, Rosie engaged the services of a bodyguard who applied for a gun permit.)

"Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option - keep your gun but permit it."
Andrew Cuomo

"I do not believe in people owning guns. Guns should be owned only by [the] police and military. I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state."
Michael Dukakis

"If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all."
U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman

"In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea ... Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic - purely symbolic - move in that directio ...


Like I said, paranoid.  They are coming to take your guns.  You better stock up.
2014-04-09 05:22:46 PM
1 votes:

CynicalLA: I own a couple guns...


Darn, I missed this amongst the rest of your wharrgarbl.  So, now I see the issue:

I'm a retarded, cowardly, nut because I support your right to own "a couple guns."

I will admit you're a convincing argument for some sort of a written test prior to being allowed to purchase one, though.
2014-04-09 05:22:20 PM
1 votes:

Geotpf: Do you know why Diane Feinstein is so anti-gun?

Because she is the one who found Harvey Milk's dead body, moments after he was shot. She checked his pulse, got his blood on her clothes.


No one in the country has benefited more from less-strict gun laws than Dianne Feinstein. She owes most of her $100M net worth to the assassination of Harvey Milk.
2014-04-09 05:00:06 PM
1 votes:

Maud Dib: KidneyStone: I bought an AR15 the day of the Newton shootings because i knew this country would flip out and prices would go through the roof.  I liked it better than the AR I already owned so I sold the old one for $500 than I paid for it, which paid for the new one plus a few hundred in profit.  I could have sold it for $200-300 more but I sold it to a friend and didn't want to dick him.

Well, there you have it in a nutshell. Profiting off the bodies of dead children and bragging about it..
This is why I hate gun nuts.
Hopefully you'll all kill each other and your progeny through accidental shootings.


http://www.news4jax.com/news/former-ju-player-dies-in-accidental-sho ot ing/25392622

http://www.wesh.com/news/deputies-teen-held-without-bond-after-accid en tally-shooting-friend/25375896#!Dn1Ao


http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2014-04-07/story/dad-charged-acci de ntal-shooting-death-his-10-year-old-daughter


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dad-cuffed-girl-10-accident al ly-shot-killed-brother-georgia-home-article-1.1748219


You wish death on your political enemies?  Mr. Putin, is that you?
2014-04-09 04:56:04 PM
1 votes:

dittybopper: CynicalLA: steve42: When you say:

Farking Canuck: The real question is "Who cares?". Everyone is discussing the same thing ... gun nuts are just trying to use semantics to discredit opinions that have nothing to do with the minutia of gun terminology.

I hear: "All private gun ownership should be outlawed because violence."

That's because you are a paranoid gun nut and probably have mental problems.

Nice.  Calling people names.

This is why support for gun control keeps dropping despite mass shootings.

Instead of calling gun owners paranoiacs with mental problems, which allows you to easily dismiss their opinions and positions without actually having to face the possibility that you might actually be wrong, you should be engaging them, learning what actually makes the tick (it's not paranoia or mental illness, btw), and seeing what things you might find common ground on.

But it has to be *EARNEST*.  You can't fake it.  See what it's all about.  Go to the range.  Shoot some guns.  Take the myth and mystery out of it.  Learn the technology and science of it*.  Meet some actual gun owners.  Ask them why they feel like they do about the things you propose, and *LISTEN*.


*One of the things I like about shooting is that it's all just applied physics.


I own a couple guns and always skip your posts.  You are the biggest gun nut on this site and have no credibility.
2014-04-09 04:55:04 PM
1 votes:

Carn: Does banning them say he's going to come to your house and take them away?  Or might they perhaps have to do something like allow existing ones and ban new purchases, since it's absolutely unfeasible to go house to house so Mr. Obama can rip them from your hands?  If you start off viewing him as the devil, there's no other way to look at anything.


Actually, I view him as the best thing that ever happened to the gun industry in my nearly 50 years of life.

1.bp.blogspot.com

/Haven't bought a gun since before the turn of the century.
//Sold a couple since then, though.
2014-04-09 04:53:58 PM
1 votes:

Farker Soze: CynicalLA: People that carry all the time are definitely pussies. They live in fear.

And like I've been saying, you're scared of them.  What level of pussy does that put you at?  Afraid of the fearful.  Sad, really.


You can't even think for yourself.  You really are a stupid person.
2014-04-09 04:47:49 PM
1 votes:

CynicalLA: Farker Soze: CynicalLA: Farker Soze: CynicalLA: Farker Soze: drew46n2: CynicalLA: drew46n2: Can we at least agree on the open-carry attention whores? I mean, I think they're hurting the pro-gun proliferators, not helping.

[img.fark.net image 500x333]

Cowards that like to intimidate people.

Funny, on their Facebook page they refer to anti-gunners as "bullies."

You two are intimidated by them?  Sounds like you're the cowards.

What?  The pussy is the one that has to wear a gun everywhere.  Stop projecting.

You're terrified of a bunch of pussies.  Oh scary!  Stop projecting.

You don't make any sense and are obviously mentally challenged.  It's no wonder why you are a gun nut.

I'm saying that you are intimidated of a group of people you label as pussies.  You sound mental.  It's no wonder you're a gun grabber.

A pussy with a gun is not good for anyone.  You are not too bright.


Is this what you have? An angry bit of running around shouting "Pussy pussy pussy!"? No wonder you are anti gun, you're a raging danger to anyone around you.
2014-04-09 04:46:53 PM
1 votes:

ultraholland: gravy chugging cretin.: Are you intimidated yet?

[img.fark.net image 850x566]

of the patriotic gimp? Slightly.


Damn, they scare me to death.  Oh wait, I'm not CynicalLA, no they don't.
2014-04-09 04:46:25 PM
1 votes:

ultraholland: gravy chugging cretin.: Are you intimidated yet?

[img.fark.net image 850x566]

of the patriotic gimp? Slightly.


American flag outfit with an AK?  Seems conflicted.
2014-04-09 04:32:56 PM
1 votes:

steve42: When you say:

Farking Canuck: The real question is "Who cares?". Everyone is discussing the same thing ... gun nuts are just trying to use semantics to discredit opinions that have nothing to do with the minutia of gun terminology.

I hear: "All private gun ownership should be outlawed because violence."


That's because you are a paranoid gun nut and probably have mental problems.
2014-04-09 04:20:33 PM
1 votes:

redmid17: For everyone's edification, the 2009 AP Stylebook entry for assault rifle and assault weapon:

"assault rifle: a rifle that is capable of being fired in fully automatic and semi-automatic modes, at the user's option. Designed for, and used by, miltary forces. Also used by some law enforcement agencies. The form: "an M16 assault rifle""

"assault weapon: a semi-automatic firearm similar in appearance to a fully automatic firearm or military weapon.  Not synonomouswith assault rifle, which can be used in fully automatic mode. Wherever possible, be specific about the type of weapon: semi-automatic rifle, semi-automatic shotgun, semi-automatic pistol"

If you guys want, I can post the AP stylebook definition of "automatic" too.


The real question is "Who cares?". Everyone is discussing the same thing ... gun nuts are just trying to use semantics to discredit opinions that have nothing to do with the minutia of gun terminology.
2014-04-09 03:55:14 PM
1 votes:
Can we at least agree on the open-carry attention whores? I mean, I think they're hurting the pro-gun proliferators, not helping.

img.fark.net
2014-04-09 03:46:46 PM
1 votes:
I'll never sell my ghost gun though.

www.everydaynodaysoff.com

"This is a ghost gun, this right here has the ability with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Thirty magazine clip in half a second."
2014-04-09 03:45:03 PM
1 votes:

dittybopper: Carn: ERberrrmerr is gonna come to take your guns any day now.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/wh_now_is_the_tim e_ full.pdf
The President's Plan includes:
...
2. Banning military-style assault weapons and high-capacity 
 magazines,


So he was lying?

Well, he *IS* a politician, but generally, when someone says they want to do something, I take them at their word.


 Ban != confiscation. Assault weapons != all firearms

And you wonder why we call you gun  nuts.
2014-04-09 03:44:58 PM
1 votes:
You have to be pretty damn stupid to be a gun nut so this is not surprising.
2014-04-09 03:43:56 PM
1 votes:
Few things give me greater pleasure than seeing a butthurt gun nut.
2014-04-09 03:38:27 PM
1 votes:
cybermech.net
2014-04-09 03:36:48 PM
1 votes:

BarleyGnome: I wouldn't mind getting an AR lower, but prices are just to insane right now, not to mention frenzy on ammo hoarding.


THIS.

Fark!  Anyone want to invest in a target ammunition company?  9mm, .223, .40, and .45.  We'll make millions.
2014-04-09 03:33:21 PM
1 votes:
jaybeezey:

You can't blame them though, they have been trained since youth to fear things that they don't understand and are soft minded enough to think that anything for "the greater good" is acceptable and right. This is especially true if you can find some reason to form a new gov't agency to regulate anything that they have an issue with. Being good sheep is about being part of the collective, and they certainly don't want to be seen as bad sheep by their Central Planning handlers.

www.studybreakmedia.com
2014-04-09 03:32:00 PM
1 votes:
I have been furiously LOL'ing at the abundance of folks putting up their near new "blackrifles" for sale in certain forums and ad bulletins.  Every single one goes like this:

"Hey guys I'm selling my AR just bought last year, 100 rounds through it.  $800 firm"

[next day] "Reduced, to $750"

[next week] "I'll take $650 for it if someone will take it off my hands"


[week after] *crickets*
2014-04-09 03:32:00 PM
1 votes:
www.thegatewaypundit.com
2014-04-09 03:27:56 PM
1 votes:
ERberrrmerr is gonna come to take your guns any day now.
2014-04-09 03:25:27 PM
1 votes:
But Obummer is gonna take 'em soon. A gun industry trade group said so.
2014-04-09 03:21:27 PM
1 votes:

drew46n2: ooh, but at least you got your "man card" reissue for the penii-impaired
[img.fark.net image 466x626]


drew46n2: And if you REALLY need to over-compensate,


[img.fark.net image 582x426]


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
2014-04-09 03:21:25 PM
1 votes:
Fools and their money yadda yadda yadda.
2014-04-09 03:21:15 PM
1 votes:

R.A.Danny: An Uzi is a rifle?


No it's a glock.
2014-04-09 03:16:45 PM
1 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: dittybopper: Actually, any assault rifle is going to net you a nice tidy profit if you hold on to it for a while, because they are by definition NFA items, and the supply was frozen by the Hughes Amendment to the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act.  Any assault rifle that wasn't registered with the ATF by the cut-off in 1986 is illegal to own.

Unless, of course, subby means "assault weapons", which is a nebulous category that seems to basically mean "scary looking guns".  They are not the same thing as "assault rifles", which are by definition machine guns.

An assault rifle is a select-fire (semi and full automatic) carbine with a removable magazine firing an intermediate cartridge that is more powerful than a handgun cartridge but less powerful than a full sized rifle cartridge.

Really? Because, uh, by definition you are wrong:

Merriam-Webster:

assault rifle
 noun

:any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use


Grats on finding either a typo in the dictionary or pointing out that some lazy idiot needs to be fired at Websters
2014-04-09 02:29:49 PM
1 votes:

drew46n2: And if you REALLY need to over-compensate,


[img.fark.net image 582x426]


You know this guy is packing a monster hog.

www.recoilweb.com
2014-04-09 02:11:49 PM
1 votes:

Jackson Herring: James!: The gun market is probably the most easily manipulated market ever.

my ten year old cousin told me the other day that obama is going take away all my guns

this is not a joke


I know. I bought twenty because Obama had veal last night. I only paid 150% of retail, so I got an awesome deal.
2014-04-09 02:10:39 PM
1 votes:

SilentStrider: Did you tell him that "gullible" was being taken out of the dictionary?


I would have tried to sell him an over-priced gun.
2014-04-09 01:52:23 PM
1 votes:
And if you REALLY need to over-compensate,


img.fark.net
2014-04-09 01:50:22 PM
1 votes:
Actually, any assault rifle is going to net you a nice tidy profit if you hold on to it for a while, because they are by definition NFA items, and the supply was frozen by the Hughes Amendment to the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act.  Any assault rifle that wasn't registered with the ATF by the cut-off in 1986 is illegal to own.

Unless, of course, subby means "assault weapons", which is a nebulous category that seems to basically mean "scary looking guns".  They are not the same thing as "assault rifles", which are by definition machine guns.

An assault rifle is a select-fire (semi and full automatic) carbine with a removable magazine firing an intermediate cartridge that is more powerful than a handgun cartridge but less powerful than a full sized rifle cartridge.
 
Displayed 71 of 71 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report