Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(NPR)   A look inside one of the most terrifying, vile places known to NPR: An NRA convention   (npr.org ) divider line
    More: Scary, National Rifle Association, NPR, Pickering, Noblesville, shooting sports, wild pigs  
•       •       •

10137 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Apr 2014 at 2:43 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2014-04-27 10:43:30 AM  
i61.tinypic.com
 
2014-04-27 11:04:47 AM  
NPR goes to NRA convention and reports the words of people actually in attendance like a good news source should.

Somehow this makes them anti-gun because libruls or something.
 
2014-04-27 11:28:59 AM  
I'm sorry, but what's so scary about this article?  None of the quotes were political, and none of the people they talked to were foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics.

Is it just scary because "ZOMG GUNS!"?
 
2014-04-27 11:35:30 AM  
The NRA is the lobbying arm for the firearms manufacturing industry - if you want the pure, uncut derp you gotta go to one of those Gun Shows at the rural county fairgrounds.
 
2014-04-27 11:40:32 AM  

Fark It: I'm sorry, but what's so scary about this article?  None of the quotes were political, and none of the people they talked to were foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics.


Uh-huh.

Todd Homan, a gun dealer from St. Henry, Ohio, has brought each of his eight children to an NRA meeting at least once. His son, Charlton, is making a return visit this year.

Back in 2001, when he was 5 weeks old, Charlton was held up on stage at the NRA meeting by his namesake, the actor and NRA President Charlton Heston, who died in 2008.

His parents carry around a small photo album, showing off pictures of that moment. Charlton Homan admits he's "kind of" sick of hearing the story.


Riiight.

"It's been something we've been doing for a fairly long time," says Jimmy Trout, a 16-year-old from Carlisle, Ohio, who's such a fan of the Browning Buck Mark line of weapons that he has its logo shaved into the back of his head.
 
2014-04-27 11:40:34 AM  
Funny, I didn't notice NPR taking a stand either way. Maybe I missed something, but I just can't find a shred of bias in the article.
 
2014-04-27 11:45:55 AM  
If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?
 
2014-04-27 11:53:47 AM  

sammyk: Funny, I didn't notice NPR taking a stand either way. Maybe I missed something, but I just can't find a shred of bias in the article.


They rarely if ever do. It's more of a sort of benign bemusement, whether they're talking guns, Nicaraguan coffee plantations, public school riots in Paris, or cancer treatment. I always think of them of having a sort of 'huh...check this out' kind of tone.

Except for The Soise. They  always have to have the background Soise for whatever it is they're doing:

"I'm standing here in this gay llama farm..." *sound of gay llamas chortling in the background*

"Here in Bangladesh, nine year olds work 120 hour weeks..." *the sound of a nine year old working 120 weeks*

Other that The Sound, I love NPR. But I HATE The Sound...
 
2014-04-27 12:05:12 PM  
I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.
 
2014-04-27 12:10:51 PM  

K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.


Fewer than a dozen posts in a gun thread, and someone has already brought up penis size. If nothing, you folks sure are predictable.
 
2014-04-27 12:11:13 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


paranoid schizophrenia?
 
2014-04-27 12:28:07 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Fewer than a dozen posts in a gun thread, and someone has already brought up penis size. If nothing, you folks sure are predictable.


Do you have a reason to feel insecure about this discussion?
 
2014-04-27 01:18:30 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


Because as "extreme" as they are, what with being a single-issue lobbying group whose sole purpose is to defeat gun-control legislation, they have been extremely effective. Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

That said, I'm not a fan. There are some things that I wish they wouldn't oppose, like universal background checks. They also pissed me off by trying to settle Heller before it made the Supreme Court because they were afraid of losing. But they don't give an inch on anything, and it's paid off for them.
 
2014-04-27 01:20:18 PM  
Pardon me, I was referring to the ILA, their lobbying arm.
 
2014-04-27 02:02:38 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


IIRC, aren't you the guy who used to own an AR-15, and now has the nerve to tell other people that they should not be allowed to legally own one?
 
2014-04-27 02:02:53 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Fewer than a dozen posts in a gun thread, and someone has already brought up penis size. If nothing, you folks sure are predictable.


K3rmy is unable to control the response, due to his inescapable psychological obsession with the subject.
 
2014-04-27 02:31:29 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


Because despite the chucklefarks they have as the public face, the NRA actually fights for gun rights that elected goofballs like this would take away
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-04-27 02:40:36 PM  
blog.joehuffman.org
 
2014-04-27 02:42:15 PM  
18 comments and not one gun pic yet?  I'm impressed.
 
2014-04-27 02:44:17 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Fewer than a dozen posts in a gun thread, and someone has already brought up penis size. If nothing, you folks sure are predictable.


You know who else is predictable? Men with small dicks and jacked up trucks.
 
2014-04-27 02:47:21 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


It pisses off the libs.
 
2014-04-27 02:52:17 PM  
img.fark.netimg.fark.netimg.fark.net
 
2014-04-27 02:52:19 PM  
Oh God. I can only imagine the Con Funk there.

It must smell like sweaty feet wrapped in burned, leathery bacon.
 
2014-04-27 02:55:08 PM  
God I love a FARK-gun thread!!  Gets me all hot and bothered.

Never too many posts until the good ol' classic standby GUN-PHALLUS or "small pecker" analogy. HA!

Hits the target EVERY time.

I should like to point out though, I usually carry a tiny little J-frame .38 "snub"


That means I got a gigantic......


-----is this a "troll" when you hope to be made fun of?
 
2014-04-27 02:55:19 PM  

hardinparamedic: Oh God. I can only imagine the Con Funk there.

It must smell like sweaty feet wrapped in burned, leathery bacon.


With the odor of gun lubricant wafting over everything.
 
2014-04-27 02:55:35 PM  
When they all leave town tonite the iq of Indy will go up a couple points. But not much more than that.
 
gad
2014-04-27 02:56:45 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Fewer than a dozen posts in a gun thread, and someone has already brought up penis size. If nothing, you folks sure are predictable.


Predictable because it's soo true. And as predictable as someone thinking that mentioning that it's predictable makes it less true. Followed by my predictable 'lol you're overcompensating for something lol'
 
2014-04-27 02:57:22 PM  

whistleridge: sammyk: Funny, I didn't notice NPR taking a stand either way. Maybe I missed something, but I just can't find a shred of bias in the article.

They rarely if ever do. It's more of a sort of benign bemusement, whether they're talking guns, Nicaraguan coffee plantations, public school riots in Paris, or cancer treatment. I always think of them of having a sort of 'huh...check this out' kind of tone.

Except for The Soise. They  always have to have the background Soise for whatever it is they're doing:

"I'm standing here in this gay llama farm..." *sound of gay llamas chortling in the background*

"Here in Bangladesh, nine year olds work 120 hour weeks..." *the sound of a nine year old working 120 weeks*

Other that The Sound, I love NPR. But I HATE The Sound...


Same here.  I especially hate when they fold in cars honking their horns while I'm driving.
 
2014-04-27 02:58:34 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.


Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.
 
2014-04-27 02:59:35 PM  
The headline is written the way it is because it got you to click on the link and/or post a comment. Is that really a surprise any more?
 
2014-04-27 03:01:02 PM  

jaytkay: However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.


img.fark.net
 
2014-04-27 03:02:31 PM  
Just renewed my NRA membership today.
Suck it grabbers. :P
 
2014-04-27 03:04:21 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-04-27 03:08:05 PM  

Doktor_Zhivago: NPR goes to NRA convention and reports the words of people actually in attendance like a good news source should.

Somehow this makes them anti-gun because libruls or something.


This.

My experience is that NPR is pretty centrist in their reporting.  You have to be far, far right-wing to consider them liberal.
 
2014-04-27 03:08:41 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


It makes people feel powerful and special that they have the lives of others in their hands. Also smarter conservatives love to feel oppressed and under threat, example:

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

 
2014-04-27 03:09:45 PM  

violentsalvation: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because despite the chucklefarks they have as the public face, the NRA actually fights for gun rights that elected goofballs like this would take away


We do not ridicule lawmakers with absolutely no understanding of how the Internet works who attempt to regulate electronic communication and copyright.

We do not insult lawmakers with no scientific training who are put on science and technology committees.

We do not suggest that lawmakers who are demonstrably ignorant of womens' reproductive health issues have no credibility when authoring laws regulating access to abortion and birth control.

For what reason, then, do gun nuts become extremely upset when legislators who are demonstrably ignorant of fundamental firearms technology propose sweeping bans on firearms?
 
2014-04-27 03:11:13 PM  

jaytkay: Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.


And since then, since 1977 when the NRA went "full retard", there has been the Hughes Amendment, the Assault Weapons Ban, the import ban of 1989, and thousands of local/regional ordinances passed. It's because the NRA went "full retard" that gun rights aren't severely proscribed.

Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. What do we need NARAL for?
 
2014-04-27 03:11:44 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


What advocacy group do you recommend then?
 
2014-04-27 03:12:06 PM  

Dimensio: violentsalvation: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because despite the chucklefarks they have as the public face, the NRA actually fights for gun rights that elected goofballs like this would take away

We do not ridicule lawmakers with absolutely no understanding of how the Internet works who attempt to regulate electronic communication and copyright.

We do not insult lawmakers with no scientific training who are put on science and technology committees.

We do not suggest that lawmakers who are demonstrably ignorant of womens' reproductive health issues have no credibility when authoring laws regulating access to abortion and birth control.

For what reason, then, do gun nuts become extremely upset when legislators who are demonstrably ignorant of fundamental firearms technology propose sweeping bans on firearms?


You have such an old account and I don't recall you ever posting anywhere and I want to know why now. You make Pocket Ninja's dumb shiat look like amateur hour.
 
2014-04-27 03:12:24 PM  

whistleridge: sammyk: Funny, I didn't notice NPR taking a stand either way. Maybe I missed something, but I just can't find a shred of bias in the article.

They rarely if ever do. It's more of a sort of benign bemusement, whether they're talking guns, Nicaraguan coffee plantations, public school riots in Paris, or cancer treatment. I always think of them of having a sort of 'huh...check this out' kind of tone.

Except for The Soise. They  always have to have the background Soise for whatever it is they're doing:

"I'm standing here in this gay llama farm..." *sound of gay llamas chortling in the background*

"Here in Bangladesh, nine year olds work 120 hour weeks..." *the sound of a nine year old working 120 weeks*

Other that The Sound, I love NPR. But I HATE The Sound...


Amen.
 
2014-04-27 03:13:11 PM  

Dimensio: We do not ridicule lawmakers with absolutely no understanding of how the Internet works who attempt to regulate electronic communication and copyright.

We do not insult lawmakers with no scientific training who are put on science and technology committees.

We do not suggest that lawmakers who are demonstrably ignorant of womens' reproductive health issues have no credibility when authoring laws regulating access to abortion and birth control.

For what reason, then, do gun nuts become extremely upset when legislators who are demonstrably ignorant of fundamental firearms technology propose sweeping bans on firearms?



Are you sure about that?  It seems to me that we make fun of science-ignorant congresscritters all the time...
 
2014-04-27 03:13:59 PM  

jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.


Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?
 
2014-04-27 03:15:36 PM  

Bob Robert: It makes people feel powerful and special that they have the lives of others in their hands. Also smarter conservatives love to feel oppressed and under threat, example:


I don't feel oppressed. I'm not even one of those "the 2nd protects the 1st" sorts. I'm even reasonable about regulation. But in my lifetime I've seen enough to know that without people pushing back we'd have total bans. Gun-control people weren't always coy about their endgame. It's only been in the last 15-20 years that they learned to be coy about it so they could make incremental progress.
 
2014-04-27 03:17:32 PM  

Dimensio: violentsalvation: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because despite the chucklefarks they have as the public face, the NRA actually fights for gun rights that elected goofballs like this would take away

We do not ridicule lawmakers with absolutely no understanding of how the Internet works who attempt to regulate electronic communication and copyright.

We do not insult lawmakers with no scientific training who are put on science and technology committees.

We do not suggest that lawmakers who are demonstrably ignorant of womens' reproductive health issues have no credibility when authoring laws regulating access to abortion and birth control.

For what reason, then, do gun nuts become extremely upset when legislators who are demonstrably ignorant of fundamental firearms technology propose sweeping bans on firearms?


This must be a parody post, because we make fun of all of those people with regularity.
 
2014-04-27 03:18:18 PM  
Omg! Guns! Im SO scared!
 
2014-04-27 03:18:19 PM  
NRA members, who pay anywhere from $10 to join for a year to $500 for a lifetime membership.

50 years up front for a lifetime membership?

That's a really shiat bulk buy deal.
 
2014-04-27 03:18:31 PM  
I'm sure the NRA will have decent convention. Unless something weird happened. Like, I don't know, they paid Sarah Palin to give a speech celebrating torture. But that would never happen, would it?

Oh dear...
 
2014-04-27 03:19:20 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: But in my lifetime I've seen enough to know that without people pushing back we'd have total bans. Gun


We'd have federal total bans because of reasons. You convinced me.
 
2014-04-27 03:19:35 PM  

steklo: [img.fark.net image 332x500][img.fark.net image 640x850][img.fark.net image 275x400]


Little do they know their menfolk would likely consider them to be convenient meat-shields if it ever came around to them having to defend themselves from anything.
 
2014-04-27 03:20:02 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


I ask people the SAME thing.
 
2014-04-27 03:21:39 PM  

Dimensio: We do not ridicule lawmakers with absolutely no understanding of how the Internet works who attempt to regulate electronic communication and copyright.

We do not insult lawmakers with no scientific training who are put on science and technology committees.

We do not suggest that lawmakers who are demonstrably ignorant of womens' reproductive health issues have no credibility when authoring laws regulating access to abortion and birth control.


Uh, yeah we do. Especially the last two.

I know you're not new here. You should know better.
 
2014-04-27 03:23:25 PM  
The_Sponge:

Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?

From John Stockton.  Seriously, when those guys ran the pick and roll and you ran into JS, it was like running into a fire hydrant.  Arm the man.
 
2014-04-27 03:24:10 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Dimensio: We do not ridicule lawmakers with absolutely no understanding of how the Internet works who attempt to regulate electronic communication and copyright.

We do not insult lawmakers with no scientific training who are put on science and technology committees.

We do not suggest that lawmakers who are demonstrably ignorant of womens' reproductive health issues have no credibility when authoring laws regulating access to abortion and birth control.

Uh, yeah we do. Especially the last two.

I know you're not new here. You should know better.


img3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-04-27 03:24:20 PM  

LeroyBourne: The_Sponge:

Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?

From John Stockton.  Seriously, when those guys ran the pick and roll and you ran into JS, it was like running into a fire hydrant.  Arm the man.


I chuckled.
 
2014-04-27 03:24:39 PM  

The_Sponge: jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.

Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?


Or this guy who is on the NRA Board of Governors since the 80's
www.congressofracialequality.org
 
2014-04-27 03:25:56 PM  

Bob Robert: We'd have federal total bans because of reasons. You convinced me.


I didn't say anything about federal total bans, though they were certainly a possibility. As for convincing you, I'm not trying to convince you. If the changes in the regulatory landscape and the rhetoric of gun-control advocates hasn't convinced you there is nothing I can do about it on a message board.

Is there something about the subject that makes it impossible for people to argue in good faith without cheap rhetoric?
 
2014-04-27 03:25:58 PM  

jedihirsch: The_Sponge: jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.

Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?

Or this guy who is on the NRA Board of Governors since the 80's
[www.congressofracialequality.org image 250x320]


1 out of how many?
 
2014-04-27 03:27:18 PM  

Fark It: I'm sorry, but what's so scary about this article?  None of the quotes were political, and none of the people they talked to were foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics.

Is it just scary because "ZOMG GUNS!"?


Well, you gotta remember that to the right-wingers, this is the strawman NPR we're dealing with; with is the libbiest liberal leftist lefty hitsquad to ever lefty-lib.
 
2014-04-27 03:28:10 PM  
The ideal thread for my rant:
Remember prohibition?  The Volstead Act was the law that provided the specifics for prohibition.  It was not just vodka, and other hard booze.  It included bottled wine beer.  Compromise might have allowed the Volstead Act to continue to exist if they will willing to compromise with 3% beer and wine, but the prohibitionists did not want to allow the sale of any wine or beer.  And they were effective with making sure what representatives survived and didn't.

Then people got sick of the stupidity, and all alcohol was legal again.

What is my point, pretty soon someone smart enough is going to take a AR, do the math, kill 55 primary schoolchildren, and that will be all she wrote.  The NRA will no longer be able to defend any reasonable gun rights and since they are the only game in town, many; many gun rights will be lost.

If the NRA is the only game in town continuing to act like they are, this will end badly for the rights of gun owners that are not profiting from the sale of more and more guns.

\Not that I am against booze, just works as an example.
 
2014-04-27 03:28:16 PM  

Bob Robert: jedihirsch: The_Sponge: jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.

Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?

Or this guy who is on the NRA Board of Governors since the 80's
[www.congressofracialequality.org image 250x320]

1 out of how many?


Does it matter?
 
2014-04-27 03:31:29 PM  

macross87: Enemabag Jones: The ideal thread for my rant:
Remember prohibition?  The Volstead Act was the law that provided the specifics for prohibition.  It was not just vodka, and other hard booze.  It included bottled wine beer.  Compromise might have allowed the Volstead Act to continue to exist if they will willing to compromise with 3% beer and wine, but the prohibitionists did not want to allow the sale of any wine or beer.  And they were effective with making sure what representatives survived and didn't.

Then people got sick of the stupidity, and all alcohol was legal again.

What is my point, pretty soon someone smart enough is going to take a AR, do the math, kill 55 primary schoolchildren, and that will be all she wrote.  The NRA will no longer be able to defend any reasonable gun rights and since they are the only game in town, many; many gun rights will be lost.

If the NRA is the only game in town continuing to act like they are, this will end badly for the rights of gun owners that are not profiting from the sale of more and more guns.

\Not that I am against booze, just works as an example.

What the heck is "wine beer"?


Barley wine? :-)

/Fan of Sierra Nevada's Bigfoot Ale?
 
2014-04-27 03:32:58 PM  
Whoops.....please ignore that last question mark.
 
2014-04-27 03:33:10 PM  

The_Sponge: jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.

Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?


Good point. Naming one exception totally blows apart my point. Silly me.
 
2014-04-27 03:34:47 PM  

K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.


Frylock - Where's Carl?
Carl (other room)- [Oh, yeah! Awesome!]
Shake - He's, uh, enhancing himself.
Meatwad - Is he learning a second language?
Carl (other room) - [Hey, you guys got a wheelbarrow in here or, uh, you know, grocery cart or something?]
Frylock - No, Carl, we don't.
Carl (other room)- [Anything with wheels?]
Frylock - No, Carl.
{Frylock and Meatwad go into the room with Carl}
Carl - What, you're telling me I got to drag this frickin' thing across the lawn? Call the neighbors. I want them to see this.
Meatwad - Oh, damn!
Frylock - Oh, my God.
 
2014-04-27 03:35:34 PM  

Target Builder: NRA members, who pay anywhere from $10 to join for a year to $500 for a lifetime membership.

50 years up front for a lifetime membership?

That's a really shiat bulk buy deal.


You sound like a guy who's not going to live past 120.
 
2014-04-27 03:36:07 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Is there something about the subject that makes it impossible for people to argue in good faith without cheap rhetoric?


Is there something about the subject that makes people argue emotionally from fear of exploding violent crime rates when in reality the rates have plummeted over the past twenty years?

/ Yes, there is
 
2014-04-27 03:36:12 PM  

jaytkay: The_Sponge: jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.

Karl Malone is an NRA member...so he is protecting himself from......himself?

Good point. Naming one exception totally blows apart my point. Silly me.


The real irony is that gun control is steeped in racism. And yes, the exceptions disprove your assertions.
 
2014-04-27 03:37:23 PM  

The_Sponge: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

IIRC, aren't you the guy who used to own an AR-15, and now has the nerve to tell other people that they should not be allowed to legally own one?


Great reading comprehension.
Your question was no answer to the question NBG asked.
 
2014-04-27 03:38:47 PM  

jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Is there something about the subject that makes it impossible for people to argue in good faith without cheap rhetoric?

Is there something about the subject that makes people argue emotionally from fear of exploding violent crime rates when in reality the rates have plummeted over the past twenty years?

/ Yes, there is


Perhaps you might answer my question with something other than a question of your own.

And I am not arguing from emotion. I am well aware that violent crime rates have been plummeting, which certainly does not help the cause of gun-control advocates. Dropping crime rates undermines their position.
 
2014-04-27 03:38:51 PM  
macross87 ,
What the heck is "wine beer"?


Link
And another NPR link answers that question. The supporters of the Volstead Act, mashups like this scared them silly.
 
2014-04-27 03:41:22 PM  

Enemabag Jones: The ideal thread for my rant:
Remember prohibition?  The Volstead Act was the law that provided the specifics for prohibition.  It was not just vodka, and other hard booze.  It included bottled wine beer.  Compromise might have allowed the Volstead Act to continue to exist if they will willing to compromise with 3% beer and wine, but the prohibitionists did not want to allow the sale of any wine or beer.  And they were effective with making sure what representatives survived and didn't.

Then people got sick of the stupidity, and all alcohol was legal again.

What is my point, pretty soon someone smart enough is going to take a AR, do the math, kill 55 primary schoolchildren, and that will be all she wrote.  The NRA will no longer be able to defend any reasonable gun rights and since they are the only game in town, many; many gun rights will be lost.

If the NRA is the only game in town continuing to act like they are, this will end badly for the rights of gun owners that are not profiting from the sale of more and more guns.

\Not that I am against booze, just works as an example.


What the heck is "vodka"?
 
2014-04-27 03:42:12 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: jaytkay: Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

And since then, since 1977 when the NRA went "full retard"


What did the NRA do in 1977 that you think I think is "full retard"?
 
2014-04-27 03:43:45 PM  

maldinero: The_Sponge: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

IIRC, aren't you the guy who used to own an AR-15, and now has the nerve to tell other people that they should not be allowed to legally own one?

Great reading comprehension.
Your question was no answer to the question NBG asked.


A question that was a pathetic trolling attempt.
 
2014-04-27 03:44:31 PM  
I am actually pro-gun, but I think the NRA does a huge disservice to the gun-owning public by saying that the second amendment is for Barrett .50-Cal's and grenade launchers as much as it is for Winchester rifles. Can't we all come to the table with some sort of middle ground compromise that says you can own as many handguns and rifles as you want, but there are certain weapons that aren't appropriate in the hands of civilians?

/pro-gun, pro-death penalty
//call me a lib all you want
///anyone else hate posting comments in the iOS app, where you can't see what you're typing?
 
2014-04-27 03:45:28 PM  

Chinchillazilla: hardinparamedic: Oh God. I can only imagine the Con Funk there.

It must smell like sweaty feet wrapped in burned, leathery bacon.

With the odor of gun lubricant wafting over everything.


It could smell pretty good then:

premierarms.com

/mmm minty!
 
2014-04-27 03:47:45 PM  
CruiserTwelve,
What the heck is "vodka"?


Something invented by the Polish used by chronic drunks because it allegedly does not give them away as easy.
 
2014-04-27 03:48:50 PM  

jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: jaytkay: Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

And since then, since 1977 when the NRA went "full retard"

What did the NRA do in 1977 that you think I think is "full retard"?


The NRA was not an active lobbying group or a political powerhouse until the 1977 NRA convention in Cincinnati.
 
2014-04-27 03:49:00 PM  
I wonder how much of their speaking teleprompter scripts had to be tossed out at the last minute the moment they found out what a major flaming racist Clive Bundy really is?
 
2014-04-27 03:50:32 PM  

hardinparamedic: Oh God. I can only imagine the Con Funk there.

It must smell like sweaty feet wrapped in burned, leathery bacon.


Well, something has to cancel out the nerd residue left from Gencon and Comiccon.
 
2014-04-27 03:50:56 PM  

zerkalo: I'm sure the NRA will have decent convention. Unless something weird happened. Like, I don't know, they paid Sarah Palin to give a speech celebrating torture. But that would never happen, would it?

Oh dear...


In my experience the people that are the loudest in their complaints about water-boarding and other methods of torture practiced by the US government are the same ones that are pro-baby murder. Somehow none of them seem to have any understanding of how hypocritical their position is on these two subjects... Harming an adult to get information is "bad", but viciously murdering a baby before it can have a real chance at life is just fine. Sorry, if you hold the latter position then you have no moral ground to stand upon regarding any subject at all.
 
2014-04-27 03:57:55 PM  

Fark It: I'm sorry, but what's so scary about this article?  None of the quotes were political, and none of the people they talked to were foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics.

Is it just scary because "ZOMG GUNS!"?


Libs are scared shiatless of everything from a pocket knife to a Derringer, yet it's apparently the pro-gun crowd who "live in fear."
 
2014-04-27 03:58:31 PM  
HangMan
I am actually pro-gun, but I think the NRA does a huge disservice to the gun-owning public by saying that the second amendment is for Barrett .50-Cal's and grenade launchers as much as it is for Winchester rifles. Can't we all come to the table with some sort of middle ground compromise that says you can own as many handguns and rifles as you want, but there are certain weapons that aren't appropriate in the hands of civilians?
/pro-gun, pro-death penalty
//call me a lib all you want
///anyone else hate posting comments in the iOS app, where you can't see what you're typing?


Why all the Barrett hate? That is one sporting rifle there, and at about five feet long, with what I assume is relatively few examples out there at about 5k per and easily traceable match .50 ammo, it is very low on my list of life risks. And consider, actually being able use one as a sniper, that would probably take some training.

Don't let a few corporate VIPs and senators hate on that and scare you. If you want to be scared of a gun think about a random 9mm or ak/ar from your looney office co-worker.
 
2014-04-27 03:59:59 PM  

TV's Vinnie: I wonder how much of their speaking teleprompter scripts had to be tossed out at the last minute the moment they found out what a major flaming racist Clive Bundy really is?


If only Bundy would have kept his mouth shut just a couple more days...
 
2014-04-27 04:00:55 PM  

HangMan: I am actually pro-gun, but I think the NRA does a huge disservice to the gun-owning public by saying that the second amendment is for Barrett .50-Cal's and grenade launchers as much as it is for Winchester rifles. Can't we all come to the table with some sort of middle ground compromise that says you can own as many handguns and rifles as you want, but there are certain weapons that aren't appropriate in the hands of civilians?

/pro-gun, pro-death penalty
//call me a lib all you want
///anyone else hate posting comments in the iOS app, where you can't see what you're typing?


Grenade launchers are regulated at an entirely different level than winchester rifles. Barrett rifles cost how much, 10-15K? Any crimes committed with those are going to be so negligible in number you'd be wasting time on that which could be better addressed elsewhere.
 
2014-04-27 04:00:55 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: jaytkay: Adolf Oliver Nipples: jaytkay: Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

And since then, since 1977 when the NRA went "full retard"

What did the NRA do in 1977 that you think I think is "full retard"?

The NRA was not an active lobbying group or a political powerhouse until the 1977 NRA convention in Cincinnati.


Interesting. I did not know that. Thank you.
 
2014-04-27 04:03:59 PM  
I'm a hunter and competition shooter, I enjoy shooting, I own several guns, and I will not join the NRA those gun crazed loonies scare the shiat out of me.
 
2014-04-27 04:04:05 PM  

TerminalEchoes: Libs are scared shiatless of everything from a pocket knife to a Derringer, yet it's apparently the pro-gun crowd who "live in fear."


I'm a liberal living in Chicago. I shoot guns but I have not reason to carry one around town. The frightened clowns are the bed-wetting conservatives who "need" a gun to visit the 7-11 in the suburbs.
 
2014-04-27 04:06:22 PM  
Deep thoughts by Sarah Palin at NRA convention:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sarah-palin-talks-waterboarding-guns-at- nr a-convention/

Spoiler: "...we baptize terrorists by waterboarding them".
 
2014-04-27 04:07:38 PM  
I'll never understand gun people. They (you) are sick people. Gun enthusiasts make bronies look normal.
 
2014-04-27 04:11:24 PM  

PapaChester: I'll never understand gun people. They (you) are sick people. Gun enthusiasts make bronies look normal.


They probably look at us and wonder why stand in line for 4 hours to get a cell phone.  And kill people while texting and driving.
 
2014-04-27 04:11:56 PM  

PapaChester: I'll never understand gun people. They (you) are sick people. Gun enthusiasts make bronies look normal.


I am not even a little bit sick. I don't hurl random insults, either, or make judgments that I am not equipped to make, unlike yourself.
 
2014-04-27 04:12:57 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.
 
2014-04-27 04:13:11 PM  

PapaChester: I'll never understand gun people. They (you) are sick people. Gun enthusiasts make bronies look normal.


img705.imageshack.us
 
2014-04-27 04:14:19 PM  

jaytkay: The frightened clowns are the bed-wetting conservatives who "need" a gun to visit the 7-11 in the suburbs.


You never know what you might run into while checking your mail, you better be armed.

/Seriously don't get the folks who feel the need to be armed 24/7.
//Concealed carry is a good thing though if you transport guns on a regular basis in your home state.
 
2014-04-27 04:16:07 PM  
I joined the NRA to specifically help fund the counterbalance to groups and politicians who want to ban access to guns.

/Own 8, none of them AR-style.
//Yet--they look like fun to shoot at the range.
///Not afraid of any shadow-dwelling boogy-man or the gub'mint--guns are simply fun to learn how to shoot properly and use for hunting.
 
2014-04-27 04:17:01 PM  

steklo: [img.fark.net image 332x500][img.fark.net image 640x850][img.fark.net image 275x400]


I learned something today.  Until your post I didn't actually realize that the image of Palin in an American flag bikini with the rifle was a shop.
 
2014-04-27 04:17:26 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: The NRA is the lobbying arm for the firearms manufacturing industry - if you want the pure, uncut derp you gotta go to one of those Gun Shows at the rural county fairgrounds.


I prefer my lobbyists to be bribing senators allowing the citizenry more power to fight government than lobbyists bribing senators on behalf of big business with the intent of screwing the citizenry.

But that's just me.  Your mileage may vary.
 
2014-04-27 04:18:27 PM  
jshine
Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment? Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.


Are you sure about that? Are they out to protect gun owners or gun sellers?

And the fact that they endorsed Romney instead of just opting out of endorsing either candidate, sure does not help them as just a gun rights organization.
 
2014-04-27 04:20:25 PM  

arentol: zerkalo: I'm sure the NRA will have decent convention. Unless something weird happened. Like, I don't know, they paid Sarah Palin to give a speech celebrating torture. But that would never happen, would it?

Oh dear...

In my experience the people that are the loudest in their complaints about water-boarding and other methods of torture practiced by the US government are the same ones that are pro-baby murder. Somehow none of them seem to have any understanding of how hypocritical their position is on these two subjects... Harming an adult to get information is "bad", but viciously murdering a baby before it can have a real chance at life is just fine. Sorry, if you hold the latter position then you have no moral ground to stand upon regarding any subject at all.


I don't know of anyone who is pro-baby murder. What the hell are you talking about?
 
2014-04-27 04:21:21 PM  

Enemabag Jones: Are you sure about that? Are they out to protect gun owners or gun sellers?


Gun sellers need a market to sell guns into.  If they're free to sell, then we're free to buy (and, by extension, own).  Yes, there may be some room to quibble around the edges of that statement, but in general, transactions require buyers and sellers.
 
2014-04-27 04:21:24 PM  

Enemabag Jones: jshine
Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment? Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

Are you sure about that? Are they out to protect gun owners or gun sellers?

And the fact that they endorsed Romney instead of just opting out of endorsing either candidate, sure does not help them as just a gun rights organization.


Romney was a yes man. He'd have done as they said.

/probably should not have supported either
 
2014-04-27 04:21:39 PM  

jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.


This. And is why I belong to both organizations.
 
2014-04-27 04:23:04 PM  

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: I don't know of anyone who is pro-baby murder.


www.quickmeme.com
 
2014-04-27 04:24:43 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Bob Robert: We'd have federal total bans because of reasons. You convinced me.

I didn't say anything about federal total bans, though they were certainly a possibility. As for convincing you, I'm not trying to convince you. If the changes in the regulatory landscape and the rhetoric of gun-control advocates hasn't convinced you there is nothing I can do about it on a message board.

Is there something about the subject that makes it impossible for people to argue in good faith without cheap rhetoric?



Nice projection.

But in my lifetime I've seen enough to know that without people pushing back we'd have total bans.

People should be afraid of total bans except in no state sans maybe CA and NY. You use scare tactics to pretend every state would see bans and after I call you on it you play semantics about what you really meant.
 
2014-04-27 04:24:56 PM  

jshine: Enemabag Jones: Are you sure about that? Are they out to protect gun owners or gun sellers?

Gun sellers need a market to sell guns into.  If they're free to sell, then we're free to buy (and, by extension, own).  Yes, there may be some room to quibble around the edges of that statement, but in general, transactions require buyers and sellers.


The NRA defends gun manufacturers and dealers because those groups are being targeted by the grabbers.

But I have yet to see an example where the NRA sided against gun owners when the interests of owners and the industry were opposed.

That is why the deep meme about the NRA being the industry's lobbying arm is so laughable.
 
2014-04-27 04:25:06 PM  
jshine ,
Gun sellers need a market to sell guns into. If they're free to sell, then we're free to buy (and, by extension, own). Yes, there may be some room to quibble around the edges of that statement, but in general, transactions require buyers and sellers.

redmid17,
Romney was a yes man. He'd have done as they said.
/probably should not have supported either


Both reasonable points, directly answered. I like this thread.
 
2014-04-27 04:25:20 PM  

Tom_Slick: I'm a hunter and competition shooter, I enjoy shooting, I own several guns, and I will not join the NRA those gun crazed loonies scare the shiat out of me.


Seconded.
 
2014-04-27 04:25:28 PM  
craigdamage:
I should like to point out though, I usually carry a tiny little J-frame .38 "snub"

That makes me moist
 
2014-04-27 04:28:01 PM  

Enemabag Jones: What is my point, pretty soon someone smart enough is going to take a AR, do the math, kill 55 primary schoolchildren, and that will be all she wrote. The NRA will no longer be able to defend any reasonable gun rights and since they are the only game in town, many; many gun rights will be lost.


So after the next inevitable mass shooting the only people we should be sorry for are the nutjob gun owners who want no limits and regulation and think their hobby and collections fall under an amendment designed to arm state militias.
 
2014-04-27 04:28:27 PM  

gad: Pokey.Clyde: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Fewer than a dozen posts in a gun thread, and someone has already brought up penis size. If nothing, you folks sure are predictable.

Predictable because it's soo true.


Curious. Do you have a link to a study that supports this?

Although, as seen throughout most of history, claiming a group of people you disagree with are less-endowed was used as a means to degrade and diminish said group.
 
2014-04-27 04:30:19 PM  

arentol: but viciously murdering a baby before it can have a real chance at life is just fine.


Science says it is not a baby. It feels no pain and has no consciousness. Good emotional appeal fallacy though. Really gets the ignorant in the feels.
 
2014-04-27 04:32:18 PM  
Enemabag Jones: What is my point, pretty soon someone smart enough is going to take a AR, do the math, kill 55 primary schoolchildren, and that will be all she wrote. The NRA will no longer be able to defend any reasonable gun rights and since they are the only game in town, many; many gun rights will be lost.

So after the next inevitable mass shooting the only people we should be sorry for are the nutjob gun owners who want no limits and regulation and think their hobby and collections fall under an amendment designed to arm state militias.


I am not sure where you are going with this, but I don't think that is my point.
 
2014-04-27 04:34:29 PM  

Gone In 26 Minutes: You make Pocket Ninja's dumb shiat look like amateur hour.


2 posts in 2 threads in 2 days dissing PN...I guess he's been hitting a nerve amongst Fark IndependentsTM
 
2014-04-27 04:34:48 PM  

jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.


They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.
 
2014-04-27 04:35:09 PM  
jaytkay:However there were far fewer who believed that they "needed" a gun because of the "big black guy" lurking around very corner.

It seems you're missing quite a bit of background on the gun-control movement.
 
2014-04-27 04:35:40 PM  

Bob Robert: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Bob Robert: We'd have federal total bans because of reasons. You convinced me.

I didn't say anything about federal total bans, though they were certainly a possibility. As for convincing you, I'm not trying to convince you. If the changes in the regulatory landscape and the rhetoric of gun-control advocates hasn't convinced you there is nothing I can do about it on a message board.

Is there something about the subject that makes it impossible for people to argue in good faith without cheap rhetoric?


Nice projection.

But in my lifetime I've seen enough to know that without people pushing back we'd have total bans.

People should be afraid of total bans except in no state sans maybe CA and NY. You use scare tactics to pretend every state would see bans and after I call you on it you play semantics about what you really meant.


That right there disproves your statement, but we could also include New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, and that's right now, in today's regulatory climate. Take it back to the late '80s-early/mid '90s, when Dianne Feinstein was pushing a total ban on "assault weapons" and Daniel Patrick Moynahan proposed legislation to tax ammunition at a 1000% rate.

Your attempt to pretend none of that happened (or continues to happen) is belied by the evidence.

Also, I speak precisely for a reason. You would do well to do the same, because when you speak in generalities someone will take an exception and try to beat you to death with it.
 
2014-04-27 04:37:45 PM  
Why is it gun fetishists always seem to be the kind of people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns?
 
2014-04-27 04:37:59 PM  

Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.


The Supreme Court has determined the proper definition and intent. It's a done deal.
 
2014-04-27 04:39:08 PM  

ghare: Why is it gun fetishists always seem to be the kind of people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns?


Because you suffer from confirmation bias.
 
2014-04-27 04:43:36 PM  

steklo: [img.fark.net image 332x500][img.fark.net image 640x850][img.fark.net image 275x400]


Poor trigger discipline on the pic of the smokin' bride
 
2014-04-27 04:46:32 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: jaytkay: Meanwhile, in reality, there were millions of gun owners in the US before the NRA went full retard.

And since then, since 1977 when the NRA went "full retard", there has been the Hughes Amendment, the Assault Weapons Ban, the import ban of 1989, and thousands of local/regional ordinances passed. It's because the NRA went "full retard" that gun rights aren't severely proscribed.

Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. What do we need NARAL for?


Remember that they helped write the 1934 NFA, the Milroy Act and the 1968 GCA. They only came out against gun control pretty recently when it was turned into a wedge issue.
 
2014-04-27 04:47:15 PM  
This avid NPR listener is also a multi-gun owner... and some swords and other things too...

WTF headline
 
2014-04-27 04:49:04 PM  

doyner: whistleridge: sammyk: Funny, I didn't notice NPR taking a stand either way. Maybe I missed something, but I just can't find a shred of bias in the article.

They rarely if ever do. It's more of a sort of benign bemusement, whether they're talking guns, Nicaraguan coffee plantations, public school riots in Paris, or cancer treatment. I always think of them of having a sort of 'huh...check this out' kind of tone.

Except for The Soise. They  always have to have the background Soise for whatever it is they're doing:

"I'm standing here in this gay llama farm..." *sound of gay llamas chortling in the background*

"Here in Bangladesh, nine year olds work 120 hour weeks..." *the sound of a nine year old working 120 weeks*

Other that The Sound, I love NPR. But I HATE The Sound...

Same here.  I especially hate when they fold in cars honking their horns while I'm driving.


Crying babies to let us know that the situation is serious, or to prove the food or drink is delicious, getting that mic right up to the mouth...
 
2014-04-27 04:49:48 PM  
ghare
Why is it gun fetishists always seem to be the kind of people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns?


You could say that for anything that people can love too much. Booze, drugs, My Little Pony.
 
2014-04-27 04:51:57 PM  

FizixJunkee: Doktor_Zhivago: NPR goes to NRA convention and reports the words of people actually in attendance like a good news source should.

Somehow this makes them anti-gun because libruls or something.

This.

My experience is that NPR is pretty centrist in their reporting.  You have to be far, far right-wing to consider them liberal.


"National Polite Republican?" They've been accused of being partisan so much that the chilling effect has them talk to more Republicans and conservatives than liberals and Democrats.
 
2014-04-27 04:53:22 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because as "extreme" as they are, what with being a single-issue lobbying group whose sole purpose is to defeat gun-control legislation, they have been extremely effective. Without them there is the strong possibility that there would be few gun owners of any IQ.

That said, I'm not a fan. There are some things that I wish they wouldn't oppose, like universal background checks. They also pissed me off by trying to settle Heller before it made the Supreme Court because they were afraid of losing. But they don't give an inch on anything, and it's paid off for them.


What exactly, is "extreme" about supporting the 2nd amendment? I joined last year just to donate some money. So far, the most "extreme" thing I have seen is them sending me emails detailing current gun legislation being put forth in my state. Without the NRA, 2nd amendment would probably be completely gone, and when that goes, other amendments have to as well (to enforce confiscation and registration laws).

NRA is absolutely dwarfed by the anti-gun lobby. Why are they not "extreme"?
 
2014-04-27 04:53:50 PM  

Enemabag Jones: jshine
Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment? Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

Are you sure about that? Are they out to protect gun owners or gun sellers?

And the fact that they endorsed Romney instead of just opting out of endorsing either candidate, sure does not help them as just a gun rights organization.


Oh, they stopped any pretense of being fair a long time ago. Republicans who don't even bother to send in the questionnaire get "A" rated. Democrats like my former Congressman who have always pushed hard for gun owners' rights get a "C" at best. They are the short arm of the Republican Party.
 
2014-04-27 04:53:51 PM  

Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.


SCOTUS has defined the second amendment.  Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.
 
2014-04-27 04:55:52 PM  
You know why the gun rights side is unwilling to compromise? Because every proposal that is labeled a compromise is a move from the status quo, towards more gun control. Agreeing to universal background checks (which would start accumulating the paperwork for registration) wont stop the calls for magazine bans, or bans on modern sporting rifles. At best it might delay the push on them for another year or two, but it wont stop it.

You want a real compromise? How about this: National Conceal Carry Reciprocity in exchange for a Universal Background check system where all records are destroyed 2 years after the transaction, and not accessible to the government at all without a search warrant?
 
2014-04-27 04:56:29 PM  
Firearm regulation is no more equivalent to a banning gun ownership, than the existence of F.A.R.s equate to banning aircraft ownership. Own whatever you want and can afford, but be prepared to be held accountable and qualified to use, store and transport what you own. I could afford to obtain a surplus L-39, but that doesn't mean I'm entitled to fly it before meeting a set of rules deemed legal by society at large. If only we could get past the bifurcated ideals of all-or-nothing campers, things could actually get better. Excuse me now while I finish my beer and take my home-built hydrogen zeppelin for a spin over the nearest outdoor festival.
 
2014-04-27 04:57:01 PM  
I own guns and have been a member of the NRA on and off for many years.  I like to shoot competitively.  I used to hunt as well.  I have a Beretta 9mm in my nightstand and a 12 Gauge pump in the closet loaded with Double 00 buckshot in case anyone decides to break in. I'm getting a CHL.
i63.photobucket.com
 
2014-04-27 04:58:11 PM  
No gun porn, WTF fark?
 
2014-04-27 04:59:15 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


It entitles you to free entry into gun shows where you can handle weapons and get an erection.
 
2014-04-27 04:59:53 PM  
Monty845
You want a real compromise? How about this: National Conceal Carry Reciprocity in exchange for a Universal Background check system where all records are destroyed 2 years after the transaction, and not accessible to the government at all without a search warrant?


I don't think NYC would allow that to happen. Although I am curious what would happen if the right to conceal carry was treated more like a drivers license where skill would have to be proven. And then states would start getting into what types of criminal records would prevent concealed carry licenses.

Interesting thought.
 
2014-04-27 05:00:03 PM  

Monty845: You know why the gun rights side is unwilling to compromise? Because every proposal that is labeled a compromise is a move from the status quo, towards more gun control. Agreeing to universal background checks (which would start accumulating the paperwork for registration) wont stop the calls for magazine bans, or bans on modern sporting rifles. At best it might delay the push on them for another year or two, but it wont stop it.

You want a real compromise? How about this: National Conceal Carry Reciprocity in exchange for a Universal Background check system where all records are destroyed 2 years after the transaction, and not accessible to the government at all without a search warrant?


And since people have been deemed "safe" through this background check, we can drop the restrictions on caliber, automatic weapons, explosives and suppressors.
 
2014-04-27 05:02:24 PM  

Thunderpipes: NRA is absolutely dwarfed by the anti-gun lobby


I'm pregnant

That's bad even by your standards.
 
2014-04-27 05:03:19 PM  

jaytkay: Thunderpipes: NRA is absolutely dwarfed by the anti-gun lobby

I'm pregnant

That's bad even by your standards.


Danged filter!

What I wrote was "zero for ten [troll score]. That's bad even by your standards."
 
2014-04-27 05:04:01 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: That right there disproves your statement


No it doesn't. CA and NY would have a very tough time voting in a complete and total gun ban. That's 2 out of 50 and in reality it would never happen. The SCOTUS would never approve of it even if it miraculously passed. So your scare tactic really turns into a delusion not based in reality. That right there disproves YOUR statement.
 
2014-04-27 05:04:54 PM  
Duke_leto_Atredes No gun porn, WTF fark? http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures
static.fjcdn.com

I like this.
 
2014-04-27 05:04:58 PM  

thisisarepeat: SCOTUS has defined the second amendment. Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.


Because no court has ever changed the meaning or removed a previous courts ruling in the history of America.
 
2014-04-27 05:06:13 PM  
This thread is now passing the derp point.  It has been fun.
 
2014-04-27 05:06:56 PM  

Monty845: Agreeing to universal background checks (which would start accumulating the paperwork for registration) wont stop the calls for magazine bans, or bans on modern sporting rifles. At best it might delay the push on them for another year or two, but it wont stop it.


Your logic here is you can't compromise because once you do, some people might still want more strict regulations. I do not believe setting a speed limit is the right thing to do, because no matter what speed you set it at, someone will always want it lower or higher. You are another wonderful product of the American education system.
 
2014-04-27 05:06:57 PM  
Quick question.

I have a Porsche 911 Cabriolet as well as a firearm.

Both of these are considered 'anti dick size' .

Am a double small penis , or does the Porsche make me small dick and being the gun owner
counteract it and make it big dick again, like  multiplying a negative 1 twice?
 
2014-04-27 05:07:15 PM  

FizixJunkee: My experience is that NPR is pretty centrist in their reporting. You have to be far, far right-wing to consider them liberal.


No...  Liberals love to spout this line... Maybe its because they believe that they are really centrists themselves...

My biggest problem with NPR is that they have a hard time actually reporting the news.  NPR loves to paint a pretty picture, and take you on a verbal artistic journey through the news...  It sets off my bullshiat meter every damned time.  Its downright creepy.
 
2014-04-27 05:07:51 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Quick question.

I have a Porsche 911 Cabriolet as well as a firearm.

Both of these are considered 'anti dick size' .

Am a double small penis , or does the Porsche make me small dick and being the gun owner
counteract it and make it big dick again, like  multiplying a negative 1 twice?


You have a strange obsession with the male anatomy, not only from your posts but even your user name. You might want to get that checked out by a doctor.
 
2014-04-27 05:08:37 PM  
deadhomersociety.files.wordpress.com

"They'll get my NPR when they pry it from my cold, dead hands!"
 
2014-04-27 05:08:40 PM  

Maul555: It sets off my bullshiat meter every damned time.


Without citations to prove your point, nobody is going to take your bullshiat meters word for it mostly because you are a nobody.
 
2014-04-27 05:13:16 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


Because, unfortunately, it's the only game in town. Reason can be countered with reason. When the other side wants to ban bayonet lugs and 50 caliber weapons, both of which have nothing to do with crime, while not lifting a finger against handguns, you realize they are pandering idiots. At that point, there's no good reason to send in your scholars. So you send in your attack dogs.

I have no interest in having a "conversation" on guns with someone who's never fired one, any more than I'm interested in debating what good driving practices are with my nine year old nephew. $35 a year is a great price for someone else to deal with the cretins trying to ban high-capacity "clips".

/no, not a conservative
 
2014-04-27 05:16:01 PM  

Enemabag Jones: The ideal thread for my rant:
Remember prohibition?  The Volstead Act was the law that provided the specifics for prohibition.  It was not just vodka, and other hard booze.  It included bottled wine beer.  Compromise might have allowed the Volstead Act to continue to exist if they will willing to compromise with 3% beer and wine, but the prohibitionists did not want to allow the sale of any wine or beer.  And they were effective with making sure what representatives survived and didn't.

Then people got sick of the stupidity, and all alcohol was legal again.

What is my point, pretty soon someone smart enough is going to take a AR, do the math, kill 55 primary schoolchildren, and that will be all she wrote.  The NRA will no longer be able to defend any reasonable gun rights and since they are the only game in town, many; many gun rights will be lost.

If the NRA is the only game in town continuing to act like they are, this will end badly for the rights of gun owners that are not profiting from the sale of more and more guns.

\Not that I am against booze, just works as an example.


Didn't that already pretty much happen at Sandy Hook, just in not quite as large a number? I'm not seeing a big change in the landscape other than in the liberal controlly states like Connecticut and New York.  And even then, folks are balking against the restrictive registration laws and giving an effective non-compliance F*** Y** to The Establishment.  On other hand, in the last number of years, background checks for firearm purchases have skyrocketed.
 
2014-04-27 05:17:38 PM  

ZeroPly: /no, not a conservative


lol "libertarians" lol

/ We're not laughing with you
 
2014-04-27 05:19:41 PM  

ZeroPly: while not lifting a finger against handguns


What not lifting a finger looks like

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/06/28/us.scotus.handgun.ban/index.html
 
2014-04-27 05:20:39 PM  

Bob Robert: Maul555: It sets off my bullshiat meter every damned time.

Without citations to prove your point, nobody is going to take your bullshiat meters word for it mostly because you are a nobody.


oooooh... and your a nobody too... who the fark cares?

/I cite NPR radio... just turn it on
 
2014-04-27 05:22:06 PM  

maldinero: Firearm regulation is no more equivalent to a banning gun ownership, than the existence of F.A.R.s equate to banning aircraft ownership. Own whatever you want and can afford, but be prepared to be held accountable and qualified to use, store and transport what you own. I could afford to obtain a surplus L-39, but that doesn't mean I'm entitled to fly it before meeting a set of rules deemed legal by society at large. If only we could get past the bifurcated ideals of all-or-nothing campers, things could actually get better. Excuse me now while I finish my beer and take my home-built hydrogen zeppelin for a spin over the nearest outdoor festival.


The AOPA will vehemently opposes new aviation regulations if they pose additional costs to pilots or owners. Like the NRA, they know the death of their sport will come gradually with government making flying ever more difficult and expensive.
 
2014-04-27 05:23:10 PM  

Maul555: Bob Robert: Maul555: It sets off my bullshiat meter every damned time.

Without citations to prove your point, nobody is going to take your bullshiat meters word for it mostly because you are a nobody.

oooooh... and your a nobody too... who the fark cares?

/I cite NPR radio... just turn it on



So your response is to study it out. Glad we figured that one out quick.
 
2014-04-27 05:23:46 PM  
dok9874
Didn't that already pretty much happen at Sandy Hook, just in not quite as large a number? I'm not seeing a big change in the landscape other than in the liberal controlly states like Connecticut and New York. And even then, folks are balking against the restrictive registration laws and giving an effective non-compliance F*** Y** to The Establishment. On other hand, in the last number of years, background checks for firearm purchases have skyrocketed.


I don't pretend to know what the magic number of gradeschoolers getting murdered by unskilled psychopaths able to do math will make people change their mind about the NRA.

I don't know what folks are doing to balk against restrictive registration laws or how they are giving non-compliance f**k y**s to what establishment. It is possible that you have different sources then I.
 
2014-04-27 05:25:10 PM  

Next week's Tom Sawyer: The AOPA will vehemently opposes new aviation regulations if they pose additional costs to pilots or owners. Like the NRA, they know the death of their sport will come gradually with government making flying ever more difficult and expensive.


Government is making flying expensive with too many regulations? You are trying hard for best derp in this thread of derps. Here I thought it was regional airlines paying poverty wages so executives and wall st can see all the gains. Or the high cost of fuel. But nah, both sides are bad libertarians have decided once again that government is ruining another sector of the economy all by itself.
 
2014-04-27 05:27:10 PM  

Bob Robert: Maul555: Bob Robert: Maul555: It sets off my bullshiat meter every damned time.

Without citations to prove your point, nobody is going to take your bullshiat meters word for it mostly because you are a nobody.

oooooh... and your a nobody too... who the fark cares?

/I cite NPR radio... just turn it on


So your response is to study it out. Glad we figured that one out quick.


I am not going to get caught up in your circle of trolling...  Right now you are trying to reel me in.  Glad I figured that one out quick.
 
2014-04-27 05:29:20 PM  

Maul555: Bob Robert: Maul555: Bob Robert: Maul555: It sets off my bullshiat meter every damned time.

Without citations to prove your point, nobody is going to take your bullshiat meters word for it mostly because you are a nobody.

oooooh... and your a nobody too... who the fark cares?

/I cite NPR radio... just turn it on


So your response is to study it out. Glad we figured that one out quick.

I am not going to get caught up in your circle of trolling...  Right now you are trying to reel me in.  Glad I figured that one out quick.


So you make a claim about the reporting of NPR, when I ask you for examples, all you can do is tell me to study it out. And now you are labeling me as the troll. How drunk are you right now?
 
2014-04-27 05:30:23 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Quick question.

I have a Porsche 911 Cabriolet as well as a firearm.

Both of these are considered 'anti dick size' .

Am a double small penis , or does the Porsche make me small dick and being the gun owner
counteract it and make it big dick again, like  multiplying a negative 1 twice?


Only if you also own a Miata.
 
2014-04-27 05:34:29 PM  

Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: The AOPA will vehemently opposes new aviation regulations if they pose additional costs to pilots or owners. Like the NRA, they know the death of their sport will come gradually with government making flying ever more difficult and expensive.

Government is making flying expensive with too many regulations? You are trying hard for best derp in this thread of derps. Here I thought it was regional airlines paying poverty wages so executives and wall st can see all the gains. Or the high cost of fuel. But nah, both sides are bad libertarians have decided once again that government is ruining another sector of the economy all by itself.


LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.
 
2014-04-27 05:38:28 PM  

Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.


So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.
 
2014-04-27 05:42:01 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: The NRA is the lobbying arm for the firearms manufacturing industry...



The NRA's tax records are public, you can Google them. Only about 1.3% of their income is from firearm-related companies. Membership dues are by far their largest source of income.

Perhaps you are thinking of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which actually is an industry trade group.
 
2014-04-27 05:42:07 PM  

thisisarepeat: Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.

SCOTUS has defined the second amendment.  Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.


Like rust, anti-gunners never sleep.

inch by inch, step by step, slowly
 
2014-04-27 05:42:45 PM  

Bob Robert: Maul555: It sets off my bullshiat meter every damned time.

Without citations to prove your point, nobody is going to take your bullshiat meters word for it mostly because you are a nobody.


To be fair, you need to disable your bullshiat meter on Fark. Just like AdBlock Plus.
 
2014-04-27 05:43:31 PM  

Man On Pink Corner: Nutsac_Jim: Quick question.

I have a Porsche 911 Cabriolet as well as a firearm.

Both of these are considered 'anti dick size' .

Am a double small penis , or does the Porsche make me small dick and being the gun owner
counteract it and make it big dick again, like  multiplying a negative 1 twice?

Only if you also own a Miata.


Fiero?
Just askin'.
 
2014-04-27 05:44:26 PM  

Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.


For the second time, he is talking about general aviation, not what you want him to be talking about. The chutzpah of you hurling insults when you can't even stay on topic is mind-blowing.
 
2014-04-27 05:45:47 PM  

CruiserTwelve: Enemabag Jones:

What the heck is "vodka"?


He meant vodak. He must be new here
 
2014-04-27 05:46:10 PM  

snocone: thisisarepeat: Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.

SCOTUS has defined the second amendment.  Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.

Like rust, anti-gunners never sleep.

inch by inch, step by step, slowly



Another coward who lives in fear every waking money of their life.
 
2014-04-27 05:47:17 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.

For the second time, he is talking about general aviation, not what you want him to be talking about. The chutzpah of you hurling insults when you can't even stay on topic is mind-blowing.



Did you not even read the post you quoted?

I will quote it again

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings?

The fact that you can't even see why it is completely on topic but felt the need to jump in again with more ignorance after you couldn't successfully debate any of your other points is mind blowing.
 
2014-04-27 05:50:14 PM  

Bob Robert: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.

For the second time, he is talking about general aviation, not what you want him to be talking about. The chutzpah of you hurling insults when you can't even stay on topic is mind-blowing.


Did you not even read the post you quoted?

I will quote it again

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings?

The fact that you can't even see why it is completely on topic but felt the need to jump in again with more ignorance after you couldn't successfully debate any of your other points is mind blowing.


General aviation is for people in Cessnas and Pipers, not airline pilots. It does NOT cost $50,000 to get a private pilot's license. The AOPA does not represent airline pilots.
 
2014-04-27 05:50:35 PM  

Brainsick: Gone In 26 Minutes: You make Pocket Ninja's dumb shiat look like amateur hour.

2 posts in 2 threads in 2 days dissing PN...I guess he's been hitting a nerve amongst Fark IndependentsTM


What does that even mean anymore? Anyway, it has nothing to do with his politics - it has everything to do with him trying way too hard to be clever in a crowd that's easily impressed by someone who can make a long setup for an extremely unfunny joke. He's right up there with meow in the 'trying way too hard to be funny unsuccessfully' category.
 
2014-04-27 05:53:04 PM  

Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.


You are the one throwing out insults. Seems weird for you to thank someone for not doing something you're already doing plenty of.

If you want to argue about the extent government regulation is hurting general aviation, then find someone else. Its irrelevant to my point. Just go look at where the AOPA is focusing its lobbying and you will see what concerns them the most.
 
2014-04-27 05:54:22 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: General aviation is for people in Cessnas and Pipers, not airline pilots. It does NOT cost $50,000 to get a private pilot's license. The AOPA does not represent airline pilots.



Most people who enjoy general aviation are working to become pilots, because the cost of training is so high. And the cost of just a PPL is very high, due to fuel costs. That's around 15-20k. Then 10-15k for multi engine if you want it. And 10k for instrument ratings. The costs add up. But thank you for letting me know you don't know anything about what you are talking about. Goodbye to you too.
 
2014-04-27 05:55:51 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: The NRA is the lobbying arm for the firearms manufacturing industry - if you want the pure, uncut derp you gotta go to one of those Gun Shows at the rural county fairgrounds.


Let's see.  Flagrant zero credibility statement about the NRA with a dash of anti-capitalistic sentiment.  Right out of Bloomberg's 'Everytown' training manual.  Tell Sharron Watt's I said hi.
 
2014-04-27 05:56:15 PM  

Next week's Tom Sawyer: Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.

You are the one throwing out insults. Seems weird for you to thank someone for not doing something you're already doing plenty of.

If you want to argue about the extent government regulation is hurting general aviation, then find someone else. Its irrelevant to my point. Just go look at where the AOPA is focusing its lobbying and you will see what concerns them the most.



I'm not arguing, I'm lecturing you on why you claim of government regulation hurting the aviation industry is laughable and not backed up by any facts. You are falling for the same THEYRE TAKIN YER GUNS scare tactics that gets so many with the dog whistle conservatives and libertarians. The problem with general aviation is the cost of making it anything other than a hobby is out of reach of most of America, and that is down to the low pay of pilots.
 
2014-04-27 05:57:27 PM  

Bob Robert: Adolf Oliver Nipples: General aviation is for people in Cessnas and Pipers, not airline pilots. It does NOT cost $50,000 to get a private pilot's license. The AOPA does not represent airline pilots.


Most people who enjoy general aviation are working to become pilots, because the cost of training is so high. And the cost of just a PPL is very high, due to fuel costs. That's around 15-20k. Then 10-15k for multi engine if you want it. And 10k for instrument ratings. The costs add up. But thank you for letting me know you don't know anything about what you are talking about. Goodbye to you too.


No, that is not correct. The vast majority of airline pilots come from the military. general aviation pilots get their licenses because they want to fly for fun.

You're simply not correct, and you haven't been from the start, yet you persist on calling us stupid. Why you are doubling down on this I'll never know.
 
2014-04-27 05:59:47 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: The vast majority of airline pilots come from the military.


This has been wrong for over 20 years, actually since the Vietnam war. Your knowledge is none, stop debating.
 
2014-04-27 06:02:49 PM  

Enemabag Jones: Monty845
You want a real compromise? How about this: National Conceal Carry Reciprocity in exchange for a Universal Background check system where all records are destroyed 2 years after the transaction, and not accessible to the government at all without a search warrant?

I don't think NYC would allow that to happen. Although I am curious what would happen if the right to conceal carry was treated more like a drivers license where skill would have to be proven. And then states would start getting into what types of criminal records would prevent concealed carry licenses.

Interesting thought.


It already is, at least in my state (I plead ignorance of the requirements of the other 49, but I imagine they have to be similar).  Before you can apply for a CHL you have to take a class.  And in said class you have to show a proficiency at using your gun.  If you don't score a certain mark, then you're not eligible for the CHL.
 
2014-04-27 06:06:33 PM  

Bob Robert: Monty845: Agreeing to universal background checks (which would start accumulating the paperwork for registration) wont stop the calls for magazine bans, or bans on modern sporting rifles. At best it might delay the push on them for another year or two, but it wont stop it.

Your logic here is you can't compromise because once you do, some people might still want more strict regulations. I do not believe setting a speed limit is the right thing to do, because no matter what speed you set it at, someone will always want it lower or higher. You are another wonderful product of the American education system.


Since we still have affirmative action, should we compromise and allow "literacy tests" at poles?  No we should not compromise, and you'r a dick for even bringing that up.
 
2014-04-27 06:07:30 PM  
you're

FTFM
 
2014-04-27 06:08:00 PM  

thisisarepeat: Since we still have affirmative action, should we compromise and allow "literacy tests" at poles? No we should not compromise, and you'r a dick for even bringing that up.


Illogical appeals to emotion. Gun restrictions are not "pole" (LOL) taxes. But I can see your education level quite clearly.
 
2014-04-27 06:09:56 PM  
static.ddmcdn.com
 
2014-04-27 06:10:23 PM  
yep you're right "poll" I have no education what so ever.
 
2014-04-27 06:11:28 PM  

Bob Robert: snocone: thisisarepeat: Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.

SCOTUS has defined the second amendment.  Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.

Like rust, anti-gunners never sleep.

inch by inch, step by step, slowly


Another coward who lives in fear every waking money of their life.


Are you talking to me?
 
2014-04-27 06:11:52 PM  

Pokey.Clyde: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Fewer than a dozen posts in a gun thread, and someone has already brought up penis size. If nothing, you folks sure are predictable.


It's all they have, but they also think about penises a lot.
 
2014-04-27 06:12:20 PM  

snocone: Bob Robert: snocone: thisisarepeat: Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.

SCOTUS has defined the second amendment.  Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.

Like rust, anti-gunners never sleep.

inch by inch, step by step, slowly


Another coward who lives in fear every waking money of their life.

Are you talking to me?



No I'm talking to the other guy who uses emotion and fear like this

inch by inch, step by step, slowly
 
2014-04-27 06:13:27 PM  

thisisarepeat: yep you're right "poll" I have no education what so ever.


That's right, you equated a tactic used to disenfranchise minority voters with restrictions on guns. That by itself makes you uneducated. But then you used pole and that sealed it.
 
2014-04-27 06:14:03 PM  

Enemabag Jones: dok9874
Didn't that already pretty much happen at Sandy Hook, just in not quite as large a number? I'm not seeing a big change in the landscape other than in the liberal controlly states like Connecticut and New York. And even then, folks are balking against the restrictive registration laws and giving an effective non-compliance F*** Y** to The Establishment. On other hand, in the last number of years, background checks for firearm purchases have skyrocketed.

I don't pretend to know what the magic number of gradeschoolers getting murdered by unskilled psychopaths able to do math will make people change their mind about the NRA.

I don't know what folks are doing to balk against restrictive registration laws or how they are giving non-compliance f**k y**s to what establishment. It is possible that you have different sources then I.


They're "balking" against restrictive registration laws by NOT registering.  I don't live anywhere near New York or Connecticut but even the casual observer should have taken note of the news reports (clearly you haven't).  From openly burning registration forms (NY) to not bothering to register the estimated large numbers of high capacity mags in CT.  It's hard to take your comments seriously when you're not even paying attention to reality and hard facts that are easily found with a modicum of google skills.  And Sandy Hook was a pretty damn big news story for you not to have any idea how many kids were slaughtered, other than you're just not paying attention, not that you have "different sources" than I do.
 
2014-04-27 06:14:41 PM  

Bob Robert: thisisarepeat: Since we still have affirmative action, should we compromise and allow "literacy tests" at poles? No we should not compromise, and you'r a dick for even bringing that up.

Illogical appeals to emotion. Gun restrictions are not "pole" (LOL) taxes. But I can see your education level quite clearly.


who said anything about taxes?  your reading comprehension could use some work.
 
2014-04-27 06:16:27 PM  

Bob Robert: snocone: Bob Robert: snocone: thisisarepeat: Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.

SCOTUS has defined the second amendment.  Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.

Like rust, anti-gunners never sleep.

inch by inch, step by step, slowly


Another coward who lives in fear every waking money of their life.

Are you talking to me?


No I'm talking to the other guy who uses emotion and fear like this

inch by inch, step by step, slowly


Please "FOR THE CHILDREN!!"  "SAVE THE CHILDREN"  "NO MORE CHILD MURDER!"      no emotion or fear mongering going there.
 
2014-04-27 06:17:07 PM  

Bob Robert: thisisarepeat: yep you're right "poll" I have no education what so ever.

That's right, you equated a tactic used to disenfranchise minority voters with restrictions on guns. That by itself makes you uneducated. But then you used pole and that sealed it.


What you call a "tactic used to disenfranchise ", others might call a "reasonable restriction".

Perhaps we should just respect all rights equally...
 
2014-04-27 06:22:06 PM  

Bob Robert: Another coward who lives in fear every waking money of their life


snocone: Are you talking to me?


Apparently, yes.

www.citizenarcane.com
 
2014-04-27 06:22:16 PM  
Aww yeah, time to sit back and see what all the whiny anti gun activists have to say..... I'm sure it will be a laugh riot.
 
2014-04-27 06:36:03 PM  

jaytkay: Bob Robert: Another coward who lives in fear every waking money of their life

snocone: Are you talking to me?

Apparently, yes.

[www.citizenarcane.com image 350x226]


amazement and pity
 
2014-04-27 06:36:18 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: No, that is not correct. The vast majority of airline pilots come from the military. general aviation pilots get their licenses because they want to fly for fun.


It's a bit more complicated than that.  Consider the episode with the 777 at SFO a while back.  A couple of Korean pilots simulator jockeys with 10,000 hours of sitting around watching a computer fly the plane almost got everybody killed when the situation called for a perfectly ordinary manual approach.  One reason for that was that nobody in Korea, including Capt. S. T. Wong and First Officer W. T. Lo,  flies small aircraft for fun or any other reason.  Meanwhile, I'll bet half of the airline pilots for US carriers have their own small planes (at least the ones who can afford to.)  Who would you rather fly with?

Having a lot of young men who are already familiar with guns has historically been a good thing in wartime, for similar reasons.  Not so much of a factor these days, of course, but WWII vets will tell you it made a difference back when they onions on their ammo belts.

Personally, I like the idea of a government that's scared shiatless of its well-armed population.  Maybe you want people who have a 20% approval rating to hold a monopoly on the use of force, but I don't see the long-term upside.  Neither does the NRA.
 
2014-04-27 06:36:23 PM  

Bob Robert: That's right, you equated a tactic used to disenfranchise minority voters with restrictions on guns. That by itself makes you uneducated. But then you used pole and that sealed it.


A 9 day old account, calling everyone in a gun thread who disagrees stupid/moronic/uneducated. Nope. Not a troll at all. Nothing to see here.
 
2014-04-27 06:44:27 PM  

FizixJunkee: Doktor_Zhivago: NPR goes to NRA convention and reports the words of people actually in attendance like a good news source should.

Somehow this makes them anti-gun because libruls or something.

This.

My experience is that NPR is pretty centrist in their reporting.  You have to be far, far right-wing to consider them liberal.


They are not Fox, so, by definition, they are liberal.

Liberal is anything to the left of Attila the Hun.
 
2014-04-27 06:56:17 PM  

Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.

You are the one throwing out insults. Seems weird for you to thank someone for not doing something you're already doing plenty of.

If you want to argue about the extent government regulation is hurting general aviation, then find someone else. Its irrelevant to my point. Just go look at where the AOPA is focusing its lobbying and you will see what concerns them the most.


I'm not arguing, I'm lecturing you on why you claim of government regulation hurting the aviation industry is laughable and not backed up by any facts. You are falling for the same THEYRE TAKIN YER GUNS scare tactics that gets so many with the dog whistle conservatives and libertarians. The problem with general aviation is the cost of making it anything other than a hobby is out of reach of most of America, and that is down to the low pay of pilots.


So if pilots were paid more, it would be cheaper to make flying more than a hobby? Sorry, but you really seem to be stretching your reasoning to deflect the effect of regulation on GA.

Even if we did accept your hypothesis that high training costs for commercial aviators was the cause of a decline in GA, one could easily point to the government regulation requiring first officers to have ATP licenses as a clear contributor to those costs.
 
2014-04-27 07:28:35 PM  
The "libruls don't own guns" shtick is weak sauce. I went to the NRA convention in Houston last year and it was similar to an arms convention.

The farking assholish thing about the NRA is those fark era make you become a member to get in.

Dicks.
 
2014-04-27 07:36:13 PM  
csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.
 
2014-04-27 07:36:49 PM  
dok9874
They're "balking" against restrictive registration laws by NOT registering. I don't live anywhere near New York or Connecticut but even the casual observer should have taken note of the news reports (clearly you haven't). From openly burning registration forms (NY) to not bothering to register the estimated large numbers of high capacity mags in CT. It's hard to take your comments seriously when you're not even paying attention to reality and hard facts that are easily found with a modicum of google skills. And Sandy Hook was a pretty damn big news story for you not to have any idea how many kids were slaughtered, other than you're just not paying attention, not that you have "different sources" than I do.


Regarding the unregistered guns in NYC, or the unregistered large capacity mags in CT, they don't have to. But if they get caught it is their ass. I have heard this "the law is the law" line from people with authoritarian lines of thought. But it never applies to restrictive gun laws.

Doing a google search for '"balking" against restrictive registration laws' failed me. It is entirely possible we choose different sources of news.

Regarding Sandy Hook, I know what that is. I am making a slightly subtle point.

We probably won't agree on much, so I respect your opinion, and we don't communicate terribly well.
 
2014-04-27 07:40:38 PM  

Oblio13: Mr. Coffee Nerves: The NRA is the lobbying arm for the firearms manufacturing industry...


The NRA's tax records are public, you can Google them. Only about 1.3% of their income is from firearm-related companies. Membership dues are by far their largest source of income.

Perhaps you are thinking of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which actually is an industry trade group.


You're giving him too much credit.
 
2014-04-27 07:41:32 PM  
Meh.  Gun rights are probably not going anywhere for the foreseeable future.  That being the case, I think we clearly need to reinforce the responsibilities that buttress the right to bear arms, meaning doing better at prosecuting people who commit crimes with guns and make threats with guns.

The folks at Bunkerville, for instance, went out of their way to use their guns to break the law and threaten public safety.  No one who went down there should ever see the outside of a prison cell again.  And if you're a gun owner who supported those chucklefarks, congratulations, you are officially no longer a "good guy with a gun."
 
2014-04-27 07:42:19 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


I'm a gun owner with an IQ of, like, at least 80. I'm not a member of the NRA. Just FYI.

/Bad subby. I see you trollin'/I'm hatin'
 
2014-04-27 07:51:27 PM  

Bob Robert: jshine: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because the ACLU will fight for any and all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, but they choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment?  Therefore, the NRA is required in order to fill in the gap and provide a well-rounded defense of all of our individual rights.

They don't ignore it. They understand the proper definition and intent. They are what you call educated and with no skin in the game like all the gun supporters who feel they are constantly under threat.


Stop lying.
 
2014-04-27 07:52:41 PM  
What a coincidence, I just came from Tombstone AZ where everyone carries open, almost.

Best sight I saw all day was a little emo girl:  pierced face, tattoos all over----single-action hogleg  hanging off her hip, she was soooooooooooooooooooooooo cute!
 
2014-04-27 07:55:44 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

It entitles you to free entry into gun shows where you can handle weapons and get an erection.


You know they make a pill for that now, right?

/Who are you, Sledge  Hammer?
www.imfdb.org
 
2014-04-27 07:55:48 PM  

Bob Robert: thisisarepeat: SCOTUS has defined the second amendment. Nobody has to speculate about it any longer.

Because no court has ever changed the meaning or removed a previous courts ruling in the history of America.


The framers of the constitution even considered it an individual right.
 
2014-04-27 08:00:16 PM  

Dimensio: violentsalvation: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

Because despite the chucklefarks they have as the public face, the NRA actually fights for gun rights that elected goofballs like this would take away

We do not ridicule lawmakers with absolutely no understanding of how the Internet works who attempt to regulate electronic communication and copyright.

We do not insult lawmakers with no scientific training who are put on science and technology committees.

We do not suggest that lawmakers who are demonstrably ignorant of womens' reproductive health issues have no credibility when authoring laws regulating access to abortion and birth control.

For what reason, then, do gun nuts become extremely upset when legislators who are demonstrably ignorant of fundamental firearms technology propose sweeping bans on firearms?


We do all those things every day around here. All the things you listed are the very bedrock of the wacky, wacky politics tab.
 
2014-04-27 08:00:17 PM  

olddinosaur: a little emo girl: pierced face, tattoos all over----single-action hogleg hanging off her hip, she was soooooooooooooooooooooooo cute!


drawception.com
 
2014-04-27 08:00:53 PM  

olddinosaur: What a coincidence, I just came from Tombstone AZ where everyone carries open, almost.

Best sight I saw all day was a little emo girl:  pierced face, tattoos all over----single-action hogleg  hanging off her hip, she was soooooooooooooooooooooooo cute!


Tombstone...

That reminds me of the Kurt Russel flick where he played Doc Holiday, the ace gunslinger sherrif known for banning private gun ownership wherever he was sherrif.

Also, is emo still a thing? Or is it kind of like a Pokemon evolution thing where emo is the rite of passage before adult onset hipsterism?
 
2014-04-27 08:01:27 PM  

Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: The AOPA will vehemently opposes new aviation regulations if they pose additional costs to pilots or owners. Like the NRA, they know the death of their sport will come gradually with government making flying ever more difficult and expensive.

Government is making flying expensive with too many regulations? You are trying hard for best derp in this thread of derps. Here I thought it was regional airlines paying poverty wages so executives and wall st can see all the gains. Or the high cost of fuel. But nah, both sides are bad libertarians have decided once again that government is ruining another sector of the economy all by itself.


What does that have to do with private pilots and AOPA?
 
2014-04-27 08:04:15 PM  

Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. An accusation of derp without even knowing what I was talking about. Here's a clue: the AOPA has nothing to do with regional airlines. They are an advocate for general aviation. And yes, regulation presents a significant burden to general aviation.

So making the profession of pilot completely unrealistic unless you can finance the 50k or more required for all the proper ratings has nothing to do with the number of people who want to get their license and ratings? I know exactly what you're talking about, you blame "over regulation" but have no clue what you are talking about. Thanks for making this debate quick and easy though. Usually the uneducated will run in circles and throw out more insults before just repeating their talking point phrase like it means something without facts.


He isn't talking about professional pilots.

The FAA has many draconian policies and requirements that are no longer useful in modern flying.
 
2014-04-27 08:05:12 PM  

udhq: Meh.  Gun rights are probably not going anywhere for the foreseeable future.  That being the case, I think we clearly need to reinforce the responsibilities that buttress the right to bear arms, meaning doing better at prosecuting people who commit crimes with guns and make threats with guns.

The folks at Bunkerville, for instance, went out of their way to use their guns to break the law and threaten public safety.  No one who went down there should ever see the outside of a prison cell again.  And if you're a gun owner who supported those chucklefarks, congratulations, you are officially no longer a "good guy with a gun."


I don't have a dog in that fight, I view ranchers as some of the wors't offenders of tax evasion in the 1%.  It pisses me off that they pay less property tax on their million acres because it is zoned agricultural than I do on my 120 acres of swamp that generates zero income for me and I have to pay $140 for a license every time I harvest one of the animals that were raised on that land.  But was he just out of the blue billed $1,000,000 for grazing fees or did it add up over time?

Also those farkers should be required to build fences and underpasses for their cows or they should have to pay ME when one of their farking black angus cows gets in the way of my truck at 12:00 am as opposed to the other way around.
 
2014-04-27 08:07:18 PM  
Liberty lovers will quit being activist and litigious when fascists stop being control-freak scofflaws.

ALL fundamental liberties need to be defended vigorously, at all times, because control freaks are never appeased, never sated, no matter how much petty interference they're able to indulge in in other people's lives, they always want more.

Rabid libertarians are also functionally destructive of civil society--or would be if we did what they wanted. Since their ideology makes them cooperate like a herd of cats in a bird sanctuary, they're not generally a threat.

Control freaks need to be opposed, constantly, because they tend to get organized. Throughout recorded history, when regular people get complacent, Kiplings "Little Tin Gods" take over and do unto others, good and hard.
 
2014-04-27 08:08:05 PM  

DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.


Did you know you can kill people with your bare hands? Scary shiat.
 
2014-04-27 08:14:42 PM  

DeArmondVI: olddinosaur: What a coincidence, I just came from Tombstone AZ where everyone carries open, almost.

Best sight I saw all day was a little emo girl:  pierced face, tattoos all over----single-action hogleg  hanging off her hip, she was soooooooooooooooooooooooo cute!

Tombstone...

That reminds me of the Kurt Russel flick where he played Doc Holiday, the ace gunslinger sherrif known for banning private gun ownership wherever he was sherrif.

Also, is emo still a thing? Or is it kind of like a Pokemon evolution thing where emo is the rite of passage before adult onset hipsterism?


8/10 if trolling. If serious, you might want to rewatch that movie.
 
2014-04-27 08:15:02 PM  

Next week's Tom Sawyer: Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: Bob Robert: Next week's Tom Sawyer: LOL. Snip...snip


Wow. This thread sure veered off course. All I meant to highlight with my aviation analogy was how these gun threads always devolve into some idiotic volley between diametrically opposed camps, allowing no quarter for middle ground whatsoever. Bob Robert ran things completely off the rails.

Re: AOPA ~ Point taken. I'm a long-time member and there are times when I find their knee-jerk response to new regs or fees unwarranted. For the most part, I perceive is that AOPA stakes out a negotiating position that favors a reduction cumbersome rules and prohibitive fees for the little guy, but there are times when a new rule only impacts regular corporate users of congested airspace and facilities, and doesn't sound unfair to me, considering the services provided for these high end users. The cost to develop and maintain approach systems and long runways should be shared among those that demand them, private or commercial. In contrast, the NRA champions absolute opposition to any restrictions whatsoever, fearing that minor compromise means death of the 2nd Amendment and citizen gun ownership. I think there's plenty of room to impose a few guidelines when a positive overall societal benefit is indicated.
I let my FOID expire in the early eighties, and haven't found a need for a gun since, yet I feel no need to deny others the opportunity to hunt, shoot for sport, or collect guns as many guns as they please. I just feel gun owners should accept a similar level of accountability for their firearms as is imposed on the rest of society to register their vehicles, radio transmitters, dogs, watercraft or exotic plants.
 
2014-04-27 08:15:08 PM  

lewismarktwo: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

Did you know you can kill people with your bare hands? Scary shiat.


Or with a heavy book. Or bookshelf. Or many other items in the bookstore.

I know a few people who use knives at work. They have to open carry because to do otherwise would be unlawful.
 
2014-04-27 08:18:04 PM  

lewismarktwo: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

Did you know you can kill people with your bare hands? Scary shiat.


I learned how to do that by watching "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm."

I don't advertise my lethal expertise when out and about, however (in order to avoid being treated differently due to my ultra-lethality).

Nonetheless, I'll make sure to arise to the cause whenever it may be required.
 
2014-04-27 08:32:37 PM  

PapaChester: I'll never understand gun people. They (you) are sick people. Gun enthusiasts make bronies look normal.


I'll never understand anti-gun nuts. They (you) are sick people. Anti-gunners make psychopaths look normal.

//that about right?
 
2014-04-27 08:33:46 PM  

NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?


I'm a gun owner, with an IQ well over twice that, and am a life member of the NRA, as is my wife.  So, what's your point?
 
2014-04-27 08:41:41 PM  

HowiPepper: NewportBarGuy: If you are a gun-owner with an IQ over 65... Why are you a member of the NRA?

I'm a gun owner, with an IQ well over twice that, and am a life member of the NRA, as is my wife.  So, what's your point?


Y'all ain't too bright.
 
2014-04-27 08:48:48 PM  

anuran: Poor trigger discipline on the pic of the smokin' bride


But other than that, sign me up!

/shudder
//thick Midwest gal with a Marlboro-scented hooha?
///Don't mind if I don't
 
2014-04-27 09:25:45 PM  

DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.


So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.
 
2014-04-27 09:34:09 PM  
Article says everyone was white and middle aged. Funny you never hear who's killing each other over sneakers in the news.
 
2014-04-27 10:03:52 PM  
Submitter is a tard and has some sort of issue with NPR.  I actually read the article.  There was nothing in it that gave me the impression that NPR finds a gun show to be a terrifying place.  Contrary to the belief of a certain subset of the population NPR is not especially liberally biased.  The article was straight forward reporting.  If anything it humanized the faceless "gun nuts" that some other news sources try to get everyone scared about.  While it might seem like a pointless bit of writing to anyone familiar with gun shows, it is an interesting article for those of us not in the habit of attending them.
 
2014-04-27 10:14:45 PM  

John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.


It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.
 
2014-04-27 10:18:09 PM  

John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.


When I traveled through Arizona and New Mexico last week---both open carry States---I saw many people doing open carry--- but I also saw a lot of stores with NO GUNS signs out front.

When I lived in Arizona from 1965--67, I was warmed very bluntly: You have a right to carry, and other people have a right to order you not to, on their property; if someone orders you not to carry on his premises, you better leave IMMEDIATELY, say "Yes sir, right away, sir!" and you better be moving as you say it.  One single word of back--sass, or a single second of lag time, could easily get you blasted--- and it would be your own damn fault.

What you Farkers fail to realize is, if you have a right to carry----everyone has the same rights as you, and if you won't take any lip off them, they won't take any off you either.

The law works, coming and going.
 
2014-04-27 10:28:15 PM  

Julie Cochrane: Liberty lovers will quit being activist and litigious when fascists stop being control-freak scofflaws.

ALL fundamental liberties need to be defended vigorously, at all times, because control freaks are never appeased, never sated, no matter how much petty interference they're able to indulge in in other people's lives, they always want more.

Rabid libertarians are also functionally destructive of civil society--or would be if we did what they wanted. Since their ideology makes them cooperate like a herd of cats in a bird sanctuary, they're not generally a threat.

Control freaks need to be opposed, constantly, because they tend to get organized. Throughout recorded history, when regular people get complacent, Kiplings "Little Tin Gods" take over and do unto others, good and hard.


That is a good post, but you need to bear in mind what Yevgeny Yevtushenko once said: "Evil people stick together even when they hate one another; good people are always found one at a time,"

Power freaks and control freaks always form teams, and hierarchies; they cling to power, and expand gradually; usually they are very personable and ready with a sincere--sounding reply: "---it's only for your own good!"
 
2014-04-27 10:37:07 PM  

olddinosaur: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

When I traveled through Arizona and New Mexico last week---both open carry States---I saw many people doing open carry--- but I also saw a lot of stores with NO GUNS signs out front.

When I lived in Arizona from 1965--67, I was warmed very bluntly: You have a right to carry, and other people have a right to order you not to, on their property; if someone orders you not to carry on his premises, you better leave IMMEDIATELY, say "Yes sir, right away, sir!" and you better be moving as you say it.  One single word of back--sass, or a single second of lag time, could easily get you blasted--- and it would be your own damn fault.

What you Farkers fail to realize is, if you have a right to carry----everyone has the same rights as you, and if you won't take any lip off them, they won't take any off you either.

The law works, coming and going.


I'm ok with that. A business should have every right to manage its atmosphere as it sees fit. My point is that people who think they are perfectly safe in a business with 'no guns zone' signs are idiots.
 
2014-04-27 11:03:24 PM  

DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.


Sounds like the sign isn't working.
 
2014-04-27 11:13:27 PM  

pedrop357: DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.

Sounds like the sign isn't working.


They never do.I know the phrase I bolded was sarcastic. but think it through, antis. Given 2 choices, where is a bad guy gonna go?
 
2014-04-27 11:19:57 PM  

John Buck 41: pedrop357: DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.

Sounds like the sign isn't working.

They never do.I know the phrase I bolded was sarcastic. but think it through, antis. Given 2 choices, where is a bad guy gonna go?


Going further, if such a sign worked, why stop there?  Why spend a bunch of money on exit scanners, surveillance, etc. when simply putting up "No Shoplifting" signs would work just as well for 1/100th the price?
 
2014-04-27 11:28:55 PM  

pedrop357: John Buck 41: pedrop357: DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.

Sounds like the sign isn't working.

They never do.I know the phrase I bolded was sarcastic. but think it through, antis. Given 2 choices, where is a bad guy gonna go?

Going further, if such a sign worked, why stop there?  Why spend a bunch of money on exit scanners, surveillance, etc. when simply putting up "No Shoplifting" signs would work just as well for 1/100th the price?


Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees and it behooves the the employer to have access to those videos in case they need to prove cause for termination, though stealing is hardly the only reason to do so.
 
2014-04-27 11:40:58 PM  

Deep Contact: Article says everyone was white and middle aged. Funny you never hear who's killing each other over sneakers in the news.



Ok, I think you're trying to argue that young black men kill each other over shoes, and that's NOT reported on, which is patently false, so much so that 'killing over sneakers' has become a dog whistle for black on black crime... but if you're trying to say that 'white and middle aged' men never commit gun crimes?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/16/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting /
http://beverly-mtgreenwood.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/unneig hb orly-feud-turns-deadly-as-cop-shoots-elderly-man-and-woman
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2014/04/26/police-man-shoots-woman-at -n atomas-home-then-turns-gun-on-himself/
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/lincoln-county-authorities-inv es tigate-report-shoo/nfhMN/
http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/25336541/deputies-man-dead-after-sh oo ting-in-central
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/28/scott-roeder-abortion-d oc tor-killer

You've got some homework to do.
 
2014-04-27 11:46:01 PM  
pedrop357: going further, if such a sign worked, why stop there?  Why spend a bunch of money on exit scanners, surveillance, etc. when simply putting up "No Shoplifting" signs would work just as well for 1/100th the price?

The sign 'works' because it allows the business owner to enforce a posted rule, should the need arise. Shoplifting is already a crime, open carry is not, but a business owner is allowed to establish rules for their business, provided they are not discriminatory against a protected class. If there was no sign, someone carrying open in the store would rightfully be able to refuse to leave, or sue the store owner for infringing on their constitutional rights, which could definitely lead to bigger problems for everyone involved.


/you knew that, didn't you?
//I feel soiled...
 
2014-04-27 11:50:16 PM  

Brainsick: Deep Contact: Article says everyone was white and middle aged. Funny you never hear who's killing each other over sneakers in the news.


Ok, I think you're trying to argue that young black men kill each other over shoes, and that's NOT reported on, which is patently false, so much so that 'killing over sneakers' has become a dog whistle for black on black crime... but if you're trying to say that 'white and middle aged' men never commit gun crimes?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/16/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/justice/florida-movie-theater-shooting /
http://beverly-mtgreenwood.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/unneig hb orly-feud-turns-deadly-as-cop-shoots-elderly-man-and-woman
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2014/04/26/police-man-shoots-woman-at -n atomas-home-then-turns-gun-on-himself/
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/lincoln-county-authorities-inv es tigate-report-shoo/nfhMN/
http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/25336541/deputies-man-dead-after-sh oo ting-in-central
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/28/scott-roeder-abortion-d oc tor-killer

You've got some homework to do.


Yeah, one or two psychos a week compared to a half-dozen murders every week in Chicago alone.  Bulletproof case you've got there, bro.
 
2014-04-28 12:04:29 AM  

Man On Pink Corner: Yeah, one or two psychos a week compared to a half-dozen murders every week in Chicago alone.  Bulletproof case you've got there, bro.


It's pretty good proof that white, middle-aged men DO commit gun crimes. Why, what did you think my 'case' was about?
 
2014-04-28 12:06:36 AM  
thugrepor
 
2014-04-28 12:07:41 AM  
thugreport.com
 
2014-04-28 12:16:35 AM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Bob Robert: It makes people feel powerful and special that they have the lives of others in their hands. Also smarter conservatives love to feel oppressed and under threat, example:

I don't feel oppressed. I'm not even one of those "the 2nd protects the 1st" sorts. I'm even reasonable about regulation. But in my lifetime I've seen enough to know that without people pushing back we'd have total bans. Gun-control people weren't always coy about their endgame. It's only been in the last 15-20 years that they learned to be coy about it so they could make incremental progress.


They're not particularly coy these days either.  They're almost like those poker players who constantly and sloppily let the cards lean forward so that everyone else can see their hands.
 
2014-04-28 01:10:54 AM  
Michael Bloomberg has committed $50M to an anti-gun campaign patterned after the NRA, yet the NRA is just a bunch of low IQ mouth breathers who couldn't find their ass with both hands.  What is the level of stupidity of someone willing to imitate someone that supposedly so dumb?
 
2014-04-28 01:36:15 AM  

steklo: [img.fark.net image 332x500][img.fark.net image 640x850][img.fark.net image 275x400]


Just a FYI, I'm sure the one in the bikini is holding a BB gun, Crossman 760 to be specific.
And it's not just the knees I'm concerned about, it is the sharpness of everything else as well...
 
2014-04-28 01:52:13 AM  

SCUBA_Archer: Michael Bloomberg has committed $50M to an anti-gun campaign patterned after the NRA, yet the NRA is just a bunch of low IQ mouth breathers who couldn't find their ass with both hands.  What is the level of stupidity of someone willing to imitate someone that supposedly so dumb?


I don't think anyone is claiming that the NRA leadership is a bunch of mouth breathers, just the majority of the dues-paying members; besides,  Bloomberg is a posturing crybaby by any metric. Finally, it doesn't help either side's case when the exchange of dialogue looks like this:

Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, (Bloomberg) said with a grin: "I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I'm not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It's not even close."

Rallying his troops, NRA Executive Director Chris Cox, speaking at the group's annual meeting in Indianapolis on Friday, said Bloomberg wants to "take away our guns."
 "He thinks he can buy the hearts and minds of America," Cox said, according to Fox 59. "I believe that God gave us this freedom and he's not going to let Michael Bloomberg take it away. Not now. Not ever."

So, both sides are smug, sneering, and believe 'God' is on their side. This should end well...

/Oy vey!
 
2014-04-28 02:28:42 AM  

redmid17: pedrop357: John Buck 41: pedrop357: DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.

Sounds like the sign isn't working.

They never do.I know the phrase I bolded was sarcastic. but think it through, antis. Given 2 choices, where is a bad guy gonna go?

Going further, if such a sign worked, why stop there?  Why spend a bunch of money on exit scanners, surveillance, etc. when simply putting up "No Shoplifting" signs would work just as well for 1/100th the price?

Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees and it behooves the the employer to have access to those videos in case they need to prove cause for termination, though stealing is hardly the only reason to do so.


Popular fiction.  Most shoplifting is not done by employees. It's done by walk in customers.  Employees that DO shoplift do it a lot tho so they account for a large percentage if you carve it up by individual.

/hello, I'd like to return this very small and very expensive item for store credit because I lost my receipt.
 
2014-04-28 03:02:07 AM  

lewismarktwo: redmid17: pedrop357: John Buck 41: pedrop357: DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.

Sounds like the sign isn't working.

They never do.I know the phrase I bolded was sarcastic. but think it through, antis. Given 2 choices, where is a bad guy gonna go?

Going further, if such a sign worked, why stop there?  Why spend a bunch of money on exit scanners, surveillance, etc. when simply putting up "No Shoplifting" signs would work just as well for 1/100th the price?

Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees and it behooves the the employer to have access to those videos in case they need to prove cause for termination, though stealing is hardly the only reason to do so.

Popular fiction.  Most shoplifting is not done by employees. It's done by walk in customers.  Employees that DO shoplift do it a lot tho so they account for a large percentage if you carve it up by individual.

/hello, I'd like to return this very small and very expensive item for store credit because I lost my receipt.


http://www.nrf.com/modules.php?name=News&op=viewlive&sp_id=1136

"According to the preliminary survey findings, the majority of retail shrinkage last year was due to employee theft, at $16.2 billion, accounting for 43.7 percent of total losses. "
 
2014-04-28 03:08:44 AM  

redmid17: lewismarktwo: redmid17: pedrop357: John Buck 41: pedrop357: DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.

Sounds like the sign isn't working.

They never do.I know the phrase I bolded was sarcastic. but think it through, antis. Given 2 choices, where is a bad guy gonna go?

Going further, if such a sign worked, why stop there?  Why spend a bunch of money on exit scanners, surveillance, etc. when simply putting up "No Shoplifting" signs would work just as well for 1/100th the price?

Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees and it behooves the the employer to have access to those videos in case they need to prove cause for termination, though stealing is hardly the only reason to do so.

Popular fiction.  Most shoplifting is not done by employees. It's done by walk in customers.  Employees that DO shoplift do it a lot tho so they account for a large percentage if you carve it up by individual.

/hello, I'd like to return this very small and very expensive item for store credit because I lost my receipt.

http://www.nrf.com/modules.php?name=News&op=viewlive&sp_id=1136

"According to the preliminary survey findings, the majority of retail shrinkage last year was due to employee thef ...


43.7% is a majority? Nobody tell Mitt Romney!
 
2014-04-28 03:19:16 AM  

Brainsick: redmid17: lewismarktwo: redmid17: pedrop357: John Buck 41: pedrop357: DeArmondVI: John Buck 41: DeArmondVI: csb: I manage at a used bookstore that, for many years, had a no guns allowed sign posted up. However, after the gun crowd became even more belligerant than usual after that guy mowed down an entire 1st grade classroom we took the damn thing down.

Cut to: last week some yahoo showed up doing the whole open carry thing along with a giant knife strapped to his leg.

After multiple complaints about said yahoo, the sign went back up again.

I guess I just don't understand the need/desire to be able to kill someone while browsing some used books.

So, you work in a place with a 'No guns allowed' signs on premises. I'm sure that must be VERY comforting.

It's tough at times, I must concede. Bad guys with guns come in at least twice a day and pilfer our registers and assualt our customers.

Sounds like the sign isn't working.

They never do.I know the phrase I bolded was sarcastic. but think it through, antis. Given 2 choices, where is a bad guy gonna go?

Going further, if such a sign worked, why stop there?  Why spend a bunch of money on exit scanners, surveillance, etc. when simply putting up "No Shoplifting" signs would work just as well for 1/100th the price?

Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees and it behooves the the employer to have access to those videos in case they need to prove cause for termination, though stealing is hardly the only reason to do so.

Popular fiction.  Most shoplifting is not done by employees. It's done by walk in customers.  Employees that DO shoplift do it a lot tho so they account for a large percentage if you carve it up by individual.

/hello, I'd like to return this very small and very expensive item for store credit because I lost my receipt.

http://www.nrf.com/modules.php?name=News&op=viewlive&sp_id=1136

"According to the preliminary survey findings, the majority of retail shrinkage last year was due to emp ...


Their words, not mine, but a plurality is called a relative majority for a reason.
 
2014-04-28 04:03:00 AM  

redmid17: Their words, not mine


-Scroll up-

redmid17: Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees


Riiiiight....'largest source' and 'majority' are two different things.
1.bp.blogspot.com
That article doesn't prove what you think it does, anyway:

NRF's recently released Organized Retail Crime survey found that 95 percent of retailers have been a victim of organized retail crime over the last 12 months.

The National Retail Security Survey is an annual survey of loss prevention executives that benchmarks retail shrinkage and operational information about how retailers are combating losses


It's not even a 1 to 1 survey, it's a survey of the executives of loss prevention companies, who 'definitely' don't have a motive to claim losses are going up

/I will concede the 'majority' of theft in that case is a correct phrasing
//though your single sentence quote didn't give that background
 
2014-04-28 04:15:15 AM  

Brainsick: redmid17: Their words, not mine

-Scroll up-

redmid17: Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees

Riiiiight....'largest source' and 'majority' are two different things.
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 224x352]
That article doesn't prove what you think it does, anyway:

NRF's recently released Organized Retail Crime survey found that 95 percent of retailers have been a victim of organized retail crime over the last 12 months.

The National Retail Security Survey is an annual survey of loss prevention executives that benchmarks retail shrinkage and operational information about how retailers are combating losses

It's not even a 1 to 1 survey, it's a survey of the executives of loss prevention companies, who 'definitely' don't have a motive to claim losses are going up

/I will concede the 'majority' of theft in that case is a correct phrasing
//though your single sentence quote didn't give that background


Brainsick: redmid17: Their words, not mine

-Scroll up-

redmid17: Because the largest source of shoplifting is employees

Riiiiight....'largest source' and 'majority' are two different things.
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 224x352]
That article doesn't prove what you think it does, anyway:

NRF's recently released Organized Retail Crime survey found that 95 percent of retailers have been a victim of organized retail crime over the last 12 months.

The National Retail Security Survey is an annual survey of loss prevention executives that benchmarks retail shrinkage and operational information about how retailers are combating losses

It's not even a 1 to 1 survey, it's a survey of the executives of loss prevention companies, who 'definitely' don't have a motive to claim losses are going up

/I will concede the 'majority' of theft in that case is a correct phrasing
//though your single sentence quote didn't give that background


Feel free to get a better source or gtfo and stfu

/my words, not theirs
 
2014-04-28 04:58:02 AM  

redmid17: Feel free to get a better source or gtfo and stfu

/my words, not theirs



thefabweb.com


/I made my point and we've gone faaaaaarrrrr off topic already with this exchange
 
2014-04-28 08:35:22 AM  
NPR.   Fails at learning how to photoshop out the leetle blue ties at the trigger guard preventing the trigger from depressing. from CNN, Fox, and all other networks.   They're behind the times.

Also, I'm not sure that is an NRA meeting. They just say it is.  That's also the same exact sign-in table setup at Gun Show product fairs.  And the lady did not put the ties on. That was done outside the building, as per the setup at gun shows.  The ammo was also turned in for a receipt to be redeemed upon exiting for the day.

Come on, if you want it to be an NRA convention.  Shop it to make sure the gun looks fully functional.
 
2014-04-28 08:36:56 AM  

Brainsick: redmid17: Feel free to get a better source or gtfo and stfu

/my words, not theirs


[thefabweb.com image 850x531]


/I made my point and we've gone faaaaaarrrrr off topic already with this exchange


Congratulations on neither getting your source nor gtfo.
 
2014-04-28 09:46:56 AM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: The NRA is the lobbying arm for the firearms manufacturing industry - if you want the pure, uncut derp you gotta go to one of those Gun Shows at the rural county fairgrounds.


Actually, the National Shooting Sports Foundation is the organization that represents (lobbies for) the firearms industry.

The NRA represents millions of gun owners, and lobbies through their Institute for Legislative Action.

The NRA is the epitome of a grass roots organization, where their power comes from millions of members from all walks of life, all giving relatively small amounts of money through membership fees or additional donations.

Very unlike, say, the Bloomberg organizations who's members are corrupt politicians, greedy at the feeding trough of an individual who promises to bankroll their elections.
 
2014-04-28 10:09:03 AM  

K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.


Why is that when liberals hear or read the word gun all they can think of is penises?
 
2014-04-28 11:04:25 AM  

pdee: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Why is that when liberals hear or read the word gun all they can think of is penises?


Sexual deprivation?
 
2014-04-28 01:21:52 PM  

Brainsick: The sign 'works' because it allows the business owner to enforce a posted rule, should the need arise. Shoplifting is already a crime, open carry is not, but a business owner is allowed to establish rules for their business, provided they are not discriminatory against a protected class. If there was no sign, someone carrying open in the store would rightfully be able to refuse to leave, or sue the store owner for infringing on their constitutional rights, which could definitely lead to bigger problems for everyone involved.


/you knew that, didn't you?
//I feel soiled...


You like being wrong apparently.  Absent any signage, businesses can and do eject customers all the time for behavior that would be constitutionally protected if it were the government trying to prohibiting it.

Businesses can kick people out for protesting, not allowing themselves to be searched, etc.
 
2014-04-28 04:37:25 PM  

Lorelle: Fark It: I'm sorry, but what's so scary about this article?  None of the quotes were political, and none of the people they talked to were foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics.

Uh-huh.

Todd Homan, a gun dealer from St. Henry, Ohio, has brought each of his eight children to an NRA meeting at least once. His son, Charlton, is making a return visit this year.

Back in 2001, when he was 5 weeks old, Charlton was held up on stage at the NRA meeting by his namesake, the actor and NRA President Charlton Heston, who died in 2008.

His parents carry around a small photo album, showing off pictures of that moment. Charlton Homan admits he's "kind of" sick of hearing the story.

Riiight.

"It's been something we've been doing for a fairly long time," says Jimmy Trout, a 16-year-old from Carlisle, Ohio, who's such a fan of the Browning Buck Mark line of weapons that he has its logo shaved into the back of his head.


Ha, by that definition of lunatic you may want to avoid concerts and sporting events. Those places are so scary you'd be a quivering puddle in a corner somewhere.
 
2014-04-28 04:58:31 PM  

Next week's Tom Sawyer: So if pilots were paid more, it would be cheaper to make flying more than a hobby? Sorry, but you really seem to be stretching your reasoning to deflect the effect of regulation on GA.

Even if we did accept your hypothesis that high training costs for commercial aviators was the cause of a decline in GA, one could easily point to the government regulation requiring first officers to have ATP licenses as a clear contributor to those costs.



So the ATP regulations that only recently took effect have been responsible for the decline in general aviation for many years?

And yes, if you paid pilots more it would make more people interested in aviation. The decline in general aviation has been traced back to the rise in fuel costs and the lowering of pilot pay. I am stating facts while people like you are replying with emotion and uneducated claims.
 
2014-04-28 04:59:34 PM  

pdee: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Why is that when liberals hear or read the word gun all they can think of is penises?


Scientific studies that show you are desperately overcompensating.
 
2014-04-28 08:20:51 PM  

Bob Robert: pdee: K3rmy: I want to go to an NRA convention to ask what is the appropriate firearm for someone who is hung like a horse?  Do other people have to turn in their firearms to compensate for my generous endowment?  I mean, it is huge enough that the first four rows of the auditorium where they give speeches would have to leave unarmed and give up there jacked up trucks to boot.

Why is that when liberals hear or read the word gun all they can think of is penises?

Scientific studies that show you are desperately overcompensating.


1/10
 
2014-04-29 02:26:48 AM  

redmid17: Brainsick: redmid17: Feel free to get a better source or gtfo and stfu

/my words, not theirs


[thefabweb.com image 850x531]


/I made my point and we've gone faaaaaarrrrr off topic already with this exchange

Congratulations on neither getting your source nor gtfo...


...he said, four hours after I left the thread
 
Displayed 263 of 263 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and 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