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.

(KHOU Houston)   Two men break into a lingerie store, bump into each other in the dark, causing one man's rifle to fire off, which spooked them both, so they both started shooting randomly, which made them think they were under fire   (khou.com) divider line 76
    More: Dumbass, Jeff Brieden, Katz, Houston Police Department, robbery  
•       •       •

5739 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 May 2014 at 8:09 AM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-01 08:08:14 AM  
I love stories like this.

"We're under attack! Return fire!"
"I AM returning fire!"
"Aaaaugh, I'm hit!"
"I think I got one of them!"
"Well, one of them got me!"
 
2014-05-01 08:12:13 AM  
 
2014-05-01 08:13:25 AM  
Responsible Gun Owners (tm)
 
2014-05-01 08:14:19 AM  
Wonder if they could hear Yakety Sax playing in the background..
 
2014-05-01 08:14:25 AM  
Made me thinking subby English un-good.
 
2014-05-01 08:14:50 AM  
Subby failed basic grammar. I will give you a pass if you were drunk or under the influence of other mind altering substances when you wrote that train wreck of a headline.
 
2014-05-01 08:14:59 AM  

markfara: Seems appropriate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcq_xLi2NGo


*shakes tiny fist*
 
2014-05-01 08:15:01 AM  

LoneWolf343: Responsible Gun Owners (tm)


To be fair, they were criminals once they broke in to the store.
 
2014-05-01 08:18:28 AM  
New ad campaign for the store: "Our lingerie causes accidental discharges".
 
2014-05-01 08:19:01 AM  
dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2014-05-01 08:20:23 AM  
img.fark.net

Mahoney, Tackleberry and friends approve.
/lotta lamps died that day
 
2014-05-01 08:20:25 AM  
Looks like three guys. Two with guns and a third guy who believed "Bring your Gun to Work Day" was Friday.

Police are hoping the public can identify them. I'm guessing Police Academy cadets.
www.imfdb.org
 
2014-05-01 08:21:31 AM  
Holy underwear, Batman.
 
2014-05-01 08:21:35 AM  
The Aristocrats!
 
2014-05-01 08:22:41 AM  
Not their first bungled job.

cineplex.media.baselineresearch.com
 
2014-05-01 08:26:21 AM  
Just a pair of knickers, then.
 
2014-05-01 08:26:21 AM  
What were they stealing at night in a lingerie store? The money's not there after closing, fellas.
 
2014-05-01 08:27:35 AM  
I knew this had to be out there somewhere

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-cLIpQNnfU
 
2014-05-01 08:34:20 AM  
LazyMedia: What were they stealing at night in a lingerie store?

Have you seen the prices on women's underwear lately?
 
2014-05-01 08:34:52 AM  
Women walk into Victoria's Secret or Latex Hut and they can browse and shop all day, the second a man walks in the clerk follows him around.  I don't blame the guys for going at 3am or being a bit nervous, sometimes you just want to browse without being moved on as fast a can be.
 
2014-05-01 08:36:46 AM  
Latex Hut?
 
2014-05-01 08:37:13 AM  
I was waiting for the part where they bumped into one another dressed in women's lingerie.

/fark
//on the
///brain.
////bad brain, no beer for you.
 
2014-05-01 08:38:16 AM  
Was it inventory night or something?  Who works retail at 3 AM?
 
2014-05-01 08:43:02 AM  
Betacamman:

Harry Freakstorm:



2 seconds, soooo close.

/that is the scene i was thinking of too
 
2014-05-01 08:44:05 AM  
Were they priests?
 
2014-05-01 08:44:16 AM  
That poor manakin. First she gets sawed (sawn?) in half, then she gets shotgunned. And I don't mean in the good way.
 
2014-05-01 08:45:48 AM  
They got their panties in a bunch and panicked.
 
2014-05-01 08:47:47 AM  
Sounds like off duty cops.
 
2014-05-01 08:48:05 AM  

GameSprocket: Not their first bungled job.

[cineplex.media.baselineresearch.com image 349x500]


Came here for this. Thank you.
 
2014-05-01 08:50:30 AM  
Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.
 
2014-05-01 08:56:32 AM  

SpectroBoy: LoneWolf343: Responsible Gun Owners (tm)

To be fair, they were criminals once they broke in to the store.


I doubt that's when they started being criminals.
 
2014-05-01 09:01:02 AM  

AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.


People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.
 
2014-05-01 09:01:40 AM  
 Nearly a dozen rounds were discharged...

This is exactly why we need to ban hi-cap magazines. If all magazines were limited to a sensable 10 rounds we wouldn't have people shooting almost a dozen rounds at one time.
 
2014-05-01 09:03:46 AM  
Is it too soon to discuss lingerie control?
 
2014-05-01 09:04:44 AM  
Guys, that is not how bump-fire is supposed to work!
 
2014-05-01 09:06:37 AM  

Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.


A law against murder is a law against something that is inherently wrong.

A law against firearms ownership in general, or that makes obtaining firearms difficult, capricious, and expensive only for the law-abiding is not a law against something inherently wrong, it's an effort to prevent the wrong (felons owning guns) through ineffective means.
 
2014-05-01 09:09:32 AM  

stevarooni: Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

A law against murder is a law against something that is inherently wrong.

A law against firearms ownership in general, or that makes obtaining firearms difficult, capricious, and expensive only for the law-abiding is not a law against something inherently wrong, it's an effort to prevent the wrong (felons owning guns) through ineffective means.


We shouldn't have any restrictions on private citizens at all because Freedumb.  For instance, want to dump a thousand gallons of bleach in your neighbor's well?  Go ahead!  It's legal now.  We can't have restrictions against that because private citizens need their Freedumb.

Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.
 
2014-05-01 09:13:03 AM  

markfara: Seems appropriate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcq_xLi2NGo


Came here to say (or post) this.
 
2014-05-01 09:13:10 AM  
Now that is a tough neighborhood. Even the thieves are scared!
 
2014-05-01 09:16:10 AM  

Carn: stevarooni: Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

A law against murder is a law against something that is inherently wrong.

A law against firearms ownership in general, or that makes obtaining firearms difficult, capricious, and expensive only for the law-abiding is not a law against something inherently wrong, it's an effort to prevent the wrong (felons owning guns) through ineffective means.

We shouldn't have any restrictions on private citizens at all because Freedumb.  For instance, want to dump a thousand gallons of bleach in your neighbor's well?  Go ahead!  It's legal now.  We can't have restrictions against that because private citizens need their Freedumb.

Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.


Okay....  Dumping bleach into your neighbors well is inherently wrong.  Write laws against that.  Mandating the exact storage containers in which individuals may transport bleach for fear that it'll get into the ground and leech into your neighbor's well is silly micromanaging, and likely to result in petty bureaucrats getting up people's butts about bringing a cup of bleach to the washing machine in a non-approved container.
 
2014-05-01 09:17:01 AM  

Carn: stevarooni: Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

A law against murder is a law against something that is inherently wrong.

A law against firearms ownership in general, or that makes obtaining firearms difficult, capricious, and expensive only for the law-abiding is not a law against something inherently wrong, it's an effort to prevent the wrong (felons owning guns) through ineffective means.

We shouldn't have any restrictions on private citizens at all because Freedumb.  For instance, want to dump a thousand gallons of bleach in your neighbor's well?  Go ahead!  It's legal now.  We can't have restrictions against that because private citizens need their Freedumb.

Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.


Yeah, that's exactly what he said.
 
2014-05-01 09:18:40 AM  

Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.


No one suggested what you said.

Way to fail twice in one thread.
 
2014-05-01 09:22:26 AM  

stevarooni: Okay....  Dumping bleach into your neighbors well is inherently wrong.  Write laws against that.  Mandating the exact storage containers in which individuals may transport bleach for fear that it'll get into the ground and leech into your neighbor's well is silly micromanaging, and likely to result in petty bureaucrats getting up people's butts about bringing a cup of bleach to the washing machine in a non-approved container.


It's wrong? Says who. Says you? Who are you to decide what is "inherently wrong". For that matter, who is anyone to decide what is "inherently wrong". Maybe we should devise some sort of system of government where people can collaboratively decide upon what the majority considers the best course of action. Yea, that's the ticket...
 
2014-05-01 09:25:52 AM  

stevarooni: Carn: stevarooni: Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

A law against murder is a law against something that is inherently wrong.

A law against firearms ownership in general, or that makes obtaining firearms difficult, capricious, and expensive only for the law-abiding is not a law against something inherently wrong, it's an effort to prevent the wrong (felons owning guns) through ineffective means.

We shouldn't have any restrictions on private citizens at all because Freedumb.  For instance, want to dump a thousand gallons of bleach in your neighbor's well?  Go ahead!  It's legal now.  We can't have restrictions against that because private citizens need their Freedumb.

Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

Okay....  Dumping bleach into your neighbors well is inherently wrong.  Write laws against that.  Mandating the exact storage containers in which individuals may transport bleach for fear that it'll get into the ground and leech into your neighbor's well is silly micromanaging, and likely to result in petty bureaucrats getting up people's butts about bringing a cup of bleach to the washing machine in a non-approved container.


Because some chucklehead won't try to transport bleach in a shoe or something?  I"m sure it's been done.  Or possibly even worse, he carries it in a container that reacts with the bleach creating noxious fumes.  Those kinds of laws (handling and transport of hazardous materials) are good for society.  The real point is that first of all, all people do not share the same opinions on morality.  Some have religion to guide them, others have philosophy, and of course some people are sociopaths or psychopaths.  You need laws that are universal, as morals are not.  Secondly a lot of people are idiots.

Anyway if you're going with "you can't restrict gun ownership because freedom and also people have morals it isn't necessary" I ask, which set of morals will we use?  We must consult with you every time a legal question arises on the subject?
 
2014-05-01 09:27:54 AM  
So every story that has a gun in it has to turn into a pro/anti gun thread?
 
2014-05-01 09:28:45 AM  

Carn: stevarooni: Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

A law against murder is a law against something that is inherently wrong.

A law against firearms ownership in general, or that makes obtaining firearms difficult, capricious, and expensive only for the law-abiding is not a law against something inherently wrong, it's an effort to prevent the wrong (felons owning guns) through ineffective means.

We shouldn't have any restrictions on private citizens at all because Freedumb.  For instance, want to dump a thousand gallons of bleach in your neighbor's well?  Go ahead!  It's legal now.  We can't have restrictions against that because private citizens need their Freedumb.

Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.


Herp!  Derp!  Herp!  Derp! (rinse and repeat)
 
2014-05-01 09:28:55 AM  

Mugato: So every story that has a gun in it has to turn into a pro/anti gun thread?


And now you know Rule #17 of Fark.com.
 
2014-05-01 09:32:18 AM  

jaybeezey: Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

No one suggested what you said.

Way to fail twice in one thread.


I'd try to explain but I feel like this would be more appropriate for you.
 
2014-05-01 09:35:50 AM  

Carn: Because some chucklehead won't try to transport bleach in a shoe or something? I"m sure it's been done. Or possibly even worse, he carries it in a container that reacts with the bleach creating noxious fumes. Those kinds of laws (handling and transport of hazardous materials) are good for society. The real point is that first of all, all people do not share the same opinions on morality. Some have religion to guide them, others have philosophy, and of course some people are sociopaths or psychopaths. You need laws that are universal, as morals are not. Secondly a lot of people are idiots.

Anyway if you're going with "you can't restrict gun ownership because freedom and also people have morals it isn't necessary" I ask, which set of morals will we use? We must consult with you every time a legal question arises on the subject?


Making a law requiring the exact containers doesn't make any sense, especially on one's own property.

But if you want to talk about the subjectivity of right and wrong, that's not a turkey baster I'm going to share with you.
 
2014-05-01 09:47:43 AM  

stevarooni: Carn: stevarooni: Carn: AngryDragon: Can't be true.  It's illegal for a felon to possess a firearm.  You telling me two of them had one?  Yeah, right.

People break laws; therefore we shouldn't have any laws.  Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

A law against murder is a law against something that is inherently wrong.

A law against firearms ownership in general, or that makes obtaining firearms difficult, capricious, and expensive only for the law-abiding is not a law against something inherently wrong, it's an effort to prevent the wrong (felons owning guns) through ineffective means.

We shouldn't have any restrictions on private citizens at all because Freedumb.  For instance, want to dump a thousand gallons of bleach in your neighbor's well?  Go ahead!  It's legal now.  We can't have restrictions against that because private citizens need their Freedumb.

Deep thoughts by Poe Tater.

Okay....  Dumping bleach into your neighbors well is inherently wrong.  Write laws against that.  Mandating the exact storage containers in which individuals may transport bleach for fear that it'll get into the ground and leech into your neighbor's well is silly micromanaging, and likely to result in petty bureaucrats getting up people's butts about bringing a cup of bleach to the washing machine in a non-approved container.


A capful of bleach, when coupled with a good amount of pumping, is a good way to disinfect a well after you've done work on it.  However, unless your neighbour is a qualified well technician, best to leave the bleach dumping to the pros.  A thousand gallons is, of course, excessive.
 
Displayed 50 of 76 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


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

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

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

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report