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.

(BuzzPo)   Not News: Store posts no guns allowed sign. News: After manager was stabbed in an assault. Fark: The stabbing was stopped by a civilian with a CCW   (buzzpo.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, Gun Lunacy  
•       •       •

6354 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jun 2014 at 7:35 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-06-26 01:43:46 PM  
White_Scarf_Syndrome:

I've never had to actually point it.  He saw that I was reaching and backed off.

Normally I do just sit and "be uncomfortable", but that is usually when I'm alone.  When I have my son I get a little Mama Bear thing going on.  You don't know what it's like until you live in this farking town.  It is almost quite literally EVERY intersection has some person there begging.


Got it - you were being hypothetical.

/ "Almost quite literally EVERY" - love it!
// Rational, responsible, reasonable CCW for the win!
/// "Don't think of it as strapping on a gun, think of it as strapping on angel wings." -my CCW instructor.
 
2014-06-26 01:45:33 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: Damn, you STILL butthurt over a blah man as president?

Get over it already, it's just sad now.


What's the point of saying "blah" instead of just "black"?
 
2014-06-26 02:00:43 PM  

Frank N Stein: Serious Post on Serious Thread: Damn, you STILL butthurt over a blah man as president?

Get over it already, it's just sad now.

What's the point of saying "blah" instead of just "black"?


Not really sure genesis. It kinda just sounds funny, and I assume it's a play on the much asserted but obvious lie that the super crazy baggers didn't in large part go off the super duper deep end because of O's race.
 
2014-06-26 02:01:26 PM  
One thing I don't understand about how people think:  When you're in the driver's seat of your car with the car being on, you have a far more lethal weapon at your disposal than a firearm.  Really.  You're basically in control of a multi-ton highly guidable missile, one that ACCIDENTALLY kills more human beings a year than all intentional AND unintentional shootings kill in this country.  You can steer it around corners, and you can correct it's aim literally right up to the last second of impact.  So why do I keep hearing about drivers feeling "trapped" by somebody standing either in front of or behind said vehicle?  The person standing there is a person.  You're IN a frikkin' WEAPON, if you choose to use it as such.

/Sorry, that's just a pet peeve of mine
 
2014-06-26 02:03:31 PM  
thedumbone:  /// "Don't think of it as strapping on a gun, think of it as strapping on angel wings." -my CCW instructor.

I hope you're kidding.  A gun is a tool, it's not a magic wand.
 
2014-06-26 02:08:15 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: Frank N Stein: Serious Post on Serious Thread: Damn, you STILL butthurt over a blah man as president?

Get over it already, it's just sad now.

What's the point of saying "blah" instead of just "black"?

Not really sure genesis. It kinda just sounds funny, and I assume it's a play on the much asserted but obvious lie that the super crazy baggers didn't in large part go off the super duper deep end because of O's race.


Ah ok. Just a fun word play type deal. I thought there might be some inside joke that I wasn't getting.
 
2014-06-26 02:08:34 PM  

rooftop235: Sounds like a move by the upper management. I'll bet the manager who got stabbed would rather have that sign down. But then again, maybe it is a good idea because the gun totin' zealots might pop out of the woodwork.


As a 'moderate' gun totin' zealot I can assure you that posting the sign is like waving a flag at a bull.

dualplains: Almost all. But you can insert the 'guns' into ALL the 'mass shootings', so, yeah. Guns are the problem.

/Why is this math so hard?


That's only because you're looking at 'mass shootings' and not 'mass killings'.  The largest mass killings in the country are traditionally all arson.  Using explosives is fairly rare in the country, but about as effective on average as a spree shooter.

Chummer45: So two guys suddenly became homicidal maniacs determined to murder a random stranger for no reason whatsoever, but then totally came to their senses when they realized you had a gun? I sense a whiff of bullshiat in the air.


1.  Who said they were 'homicidal maniacs'?  They could just be marginal psychopaths.
2.  They weren't after a random stranger, they got a random stranger
3.  Don't you remember all the stories about crooks running away when they hear a 12 gauge pump?  You're definitely smelling shiat, but it's not from a bull.

Chummer45: Fun fact: many gun stores and gun shows don't allow concealed or open carry of loaded guns.


True, but this is often imposed on them for liability purposes.  Last several I went to amounted to openly carried firearms needed to be locked open with a zip tie, and concealed firearms were not to be pulled unless there was a critical need.

You want armed though, visit a jewelry show.

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Since he was attacked successfully 5-6 times, I'd say he wasn't successful in stopping the attack. Since it says he "chased him down" I'd pretty much say it confirms he finished with the stabbing and left before he was "chased down". You don't chase down something that is standing still stabbing someone. Every verb in the article indicates that he, in no way, stopped the attack.


Stabbing somebody 5-6 times takes what, 2-3 seconds?  He could have seen the guy pulling the gun and decided to run, to which the CCW'er responded by chasing.  Doesn't mean that he didn't stop the attack.
 
2014-06-26 02:08:51 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: A gun is a tool, it's not a magic wand.


This.

img-cache.cdn.gaiaonline.com
 
2014-06-26 02:17:11 PM  

feckingmorons: I don't go to businesses that have no gun signs. I usually carry a gun.

I do go to the post office, but I can secure my gun in a locked compartment in my car. Few violent crimes in the Post Office, lots of violent crimes in stores and gas stations, and restaurants.


In all fairness, there is not much money to be robbed from a Post Office.  Plus you immediately have the FBI on your tracks if you do.  High risk with little reward.
 
2014-06-26 02:24:28 PM  

Egoy3k: Gun bans are not intended to stop robberies and nobody thinks that they are.  They are intended to prevent liability from falling on the property owner when an angry old fart shoots someone for texting in a theater or some clumsy jackass accidentally shoots someone.  So in other words the gun bans are not caused by 'gun grabbers' but by a few irresponsible gun owners creating risks that could financially impact a business.


Well shiat, when you put it like that you make most of this thread look like idiots.  Now why'd you have to go and do a thing like that?
 
2014-06-26 02:33:39 PM  

FreakyBunny: dookdookdook:

Hey, if it were up to me (and most of the rest of the civilized world) Cheney and Bush would be about 10 years into their 40 year prison sentences as we speak.

Or is this more "a Bubba with a hunting rifle can keep the US Marines in check because liberty and freedom and guerrilla warfare and such"?

All of this. Cheney and Bush broke international law and as a consequence over 100,000 people were killed. As if that wasn't not bad enough, all the work they did is being undone by a few thousand thugs who are taking over the country whose freedom only cost them 1.7 trillion dollars, and over 5,000 American lives. How do these guys get a pass? Is it that the scale of these atrocities are so utterly incomprehensible?

A thousand Bubbas couldn't withstand the might of the American Army. The thought that a few guys with rifles could do much damage to a drone or an Apache is absurd. The whole "we gotta protecer erseffs from the guvernment" doesn't wash.



Errr. Aforementioned ISIS just took over most of Iraqi with about 3,000 bubba's  and an army/populace that didn't like the federal. That's the jist of how some expect it'd go down in the US if the military was ordered to fire on civilians armed or otherwise.

So, yeah.
 
2014-06-26 02:35:55 PM  

primarycolorman: FreakyBunny: dookdookdook:

Hey, if it were up to me (and most of the rest of the civilized world) Cheney and Bush would be about 10 years into their 40 year prison sentences as we speak.

Or is this more "a Bubba with a hunting rifle can keep the US Marines in check because liberty and freedom and guerrilla warfare and such"?

All of this. Cheney and Bush broke international law and as a consequence over 100,000 people were killed. As if that wasn't not bad enough, all the work they did is being undone by a few thousand thugs who are taking over the country whose freedom only cost them 1.7 trillion dollars, and over 5,000 American lives. How do these guys get a pass? Is it that the scale of these atrocities are so utterly incomprehensible?

A thousand Bubbas couldn't withstand the might of the American Army. The thought that a few guys with rifles could do much damage to a drone or an Apache is absurd. The whole "we gotta protecer erseffs from the guvernment" doesn't wash.


Errr. Aforementioned ISIS just took over most of Iraqi with about 3,000 bubba's  and an army/populace that didn't like the federal. That's the jist of how some expect it'd go down in the US if the military was ordered to fire on civilians armed or otherwise.

So, yeah.



So then....  Why is it important for U.S. Civilians to be armed again?
 
2014-06-26 02:38:57 PM  

Chummer45: So then....  Why is it important for U.S. Civilians to be armed again?


It doesn't need to be important to be a right.
 
2014-06-26 02:40:18 PM  

primarycolorman: Aforementioned ISIS just took over most of Iraqi with about 3,000 bubba's and an army/populace that didn't like the federal.


You are hilariously misinformed.
 
2014-06-26 02:48:36 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: FTDA: Frank N Stein: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I mean sweet jebus, I've lived in the worst neighborhoods of NYC, Chicago, Boston

What Chicago neighborhood did you live in?

The one Barak Obama was a community organizer for?

Damn, you STILL butthurt over a blah man as president?

Get over it already, it's just sad now.


Nope, but I knew I could bait a hook with that comment and at least get one bite!
 
2014-06-26 02:49:20 PM  

TheGregiss: You definately should have murdered them for trying to find out who was roaming around on their neighbors property during a storm. You big hero.

You trolling? These weren't my neighbors.  I know my neighbors.  These were guys who came looking for somebody and stated clearly that they intended to kill me (when they thought I might be him) at night during a black-out. Maybe they were looking for somebody who used to live there since I had only recently moved in. I dunno.

Chummer45: So two guys suddenly became homicidal maniacs determined to murder a random stranger for no reason whatsoever, but then totally came to their senses when they realized you had a gun?    I sense a whiff of bullshiat in the air.

Check your pants then. They were trying to sneak up on and do great harm to somebody that was unprepared to deal with them. A gun and a clear intent to put it to use made them rethink their strategy. They were clearly capable of rational thought, so they weren't maniacs, just homicidal. Maybe they finally agreed it was a case of mistaken identity because they guy they meant to go after didn't own/carry guns and would never hurt a fly. Don't ask me to explain their thinking, I can only explain mine.
 
2014-06-26 02:51:29 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: You are hilariously misinformed.


That is what has been rolling on NPR for the last two weeks. Feel free to argue it with their fact-check department. Sure, they are making use of local thugs to do some of the work but.. we've got those too.
 
2014-06-26 02:54:47 PM  

FTDA: Serious Post on Serious Thread: FTDA: Frank N Stein: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I mean sweet jebus, I've lived in the worst neighborhoods of NYC, Chicago, Boston

What Chicago neighborhood did you live in?

The one Barak Obama was a community organizer for?

Damn, you STILL butthurt over a blah man as president?

Get over it already, it's just sad now.

Nope, but I knew I could bait a hook with that comment and at least get one bite!


oh _you.jpg
 
2014-06-26 03:00:32 PM  

Chummer45: So then.... Why is it important for U.S. Civilians to be armed again?


Because local authorities have a long, long history in this nation of suspending or circumventing civil rights of minority groups that weren't armed and organized. It's supposedly the finally protection for a 2% minority that can't swing enough weight to prevent getting squished politically. And brother, we've squished some minorities in this nation over the years.
 
2014-06-26 03:14:47 PM  

GoldSpider: feckingmorons: I guess I'm a gun totin' zealot, but if I'm ever shot at again I want to be able to shoot back.

It sounds like you frequently put yourself into places/situations where you fear you may be shot at.  I wonder why that is.


I've only been shot at twice. Once when I was a police officer. I didn't shoot back because I didn't have an adequate back stop.

The second was when I stopped to help an elderly couple with what appeared to be just a broken down car, they were being robbed at that time. I had to go back to my car for a gun. Now I carry a gun almost all the time. I may help another elderly couple some day.
 
2014-06-26 03:17:04 PM  

KeatingFive: feckingmorons: I don't go to businesses that have no gun signs. I usually carry a gun.

I do go to the post office, but I can secure my gun in a locked compartment in my car. Few violent crimes in the Post Office, lots of violent crimes in stores and gas stations, and restaurants.

Businesses are free to make any rules regarding guns they wish. There are always other options for me.

I guess I'm a gun totin' zealot, but if I'm ever shot at again I want to be able to shoot back.

You won't have a chance. That's real life. I know in your mind you're Clint Eastwood starring in your own personal movie.

But that's actually a mental disorder.


I don't have to shoot the criminal. or stop him, or capture him, or do anything else but get my arse out of there. I'm not the cops these days. If I'm shooting at him he will hide so I can run away screaming like a little girl. I'm good with that.
 
2014-06-26 03:25:05 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm guessing your screen name is self referential.Where the fark do you shop/live in the US where you are regularly shot at? Do you frequent illegal gambling dens? Whore houses? Chicken fight basements? White supremacist meetings? Ameature bomb making conventions? Retard friendly gun conventions?I mean sweet jebus, I've lived in the worst neighborhoods of NYC, Chicago, Boston and borderline shiatholes of London and Prague. And the "lots of violent crimes in stores, and gas stations, and restaurants" delusion you have is delusional.shiat happens, but I'm more afraid of some asshole deciding he's gotta stand his ground against a kid in a hoodie or 'shoot back' in some situation hr created playing Dirty Harry and I get caught by friendly fire than I am of finding myself a victim in a bank robbery.You are nuts. Completely paranoid delusional. And a sad example of an adult who still believes the boogie man lives under his bed. Pathetic. Frankly I wouldn't care if not for the fact you are the greatest danger to me and mines safety than any made up fantasy Charleton Heston tripe you believe.


No my name is plural, it refers to a group of other people such as yourself.

I never said I was regularly shot at. I've been shot at twice in my life, one was related to my occupation the second was happenstance. If it should happen a third time I should like to have the proper tools with which to defend myself readily at hand.

We don't generally use the word retard, it is insensitive and shows a lack of adequate vocabulary and a cogent means to express oneself.

I'm fairly certain one of us is nuts, but I don't think it is me.

It is too bad you can't have a civil discourse without insulting people. Have a nice life.
 
2014-06-26 03:46:27 PM  

feckingmorons: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm guessing your screen name is self referential.Where the fark do you shop/live in the US where you are regularly shot at? Do you frequent illegal gambling dens? Whore houses? Chicken fight basements? White supremacist meetings? Ameature bomb making conventions? Retard friendly gun conventions?I mean sweet jebus, I've lived in the worst neighborhoods of NYC, Chicago, Boston and borderline shiatholes of London and Prague. And the "lots of violent crimes in stores, and gas stations, and restaurants" delusion you have is delusional.shiat happens, but I'm more afraid of some asshole deciding he's gotta stand his ground against a kid in a hoodie or 'shoot back' in some situation hr created playing Dirty Harry and I get caught by friendly fire than I am of finding myself a victim in a bank robbery.You are nuts. Completely paranoid delusional. And a sad example of an adult who still believes the boogie man lives under his bed. Pathetic. Frankly I wouldn't care if not for the fact you are the greatest danger to me and mines safety than any made up fantasy Charleton Heston tripe you believe.

No my name is plural, it refers to a group of other people such as yourself.

I never said I was regularly shot at. I've been shot at twice in my life, one was related to my occupation the second was happenstance. If it should happen a third time I should like to have the proper tools with which to defend myself readily at hand.

We don't generally use the word retard, it is insensitive and shows a lack of adequate vocabulary and a cogent means to express oneself.

I'm fairly certain one of us is nuts, but I don't think it is me.

It is too bad you can't have a civil discourse without insulting people. Have a nice life.


You sound retarded.

welcome_to_f...

Oh nevermind.

Also oh, maybe if some basic gun law reform (no one will take your binky, pinky swear, unless you fail the psych exam, so ok, maybe someone will take your binky) could be discussed without GUN GRABBER LIBTARDS maybe non pejorative discourse would ensue.
 
2014-06-26 03:54:28 PM  
FreakyBunny:  A thousand Bubbas couldn't withstand the might of the American Army. The thought that a few guys with rifles could do much damage to a drone or an Apache is absurd. The whole "we gotta protecer erseffs from the guvernment" doesn't wash.

You're assuming that the American military would open fire on the American people if they refuse to be disarmed.  That's REALLY not a foregone conclusion.  You might want to do a little reading about how the "Zetas" recruit members of the Mexican military, and that's strictly for monetary compensation in a drug cartel, which is about as far away from a Civil Rights issue as you can get.
 
2014-06-26 04:04:05 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: feckingmorons: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm guessing your screen name is self referential.Where the fark do you shop/live in the US where you are regularly shot at? Do you frequent illegal gambling dens? Whore houses? Chicken fight basements? White supremacist meetings? Ameature bomb making conventions? Retard friendly gun conventions?I mean sweet jebus, I've lived in the worst neighborhoods of NYC, Chicago, Boston and borderline shiatholes of London and Prague. And the "lots of violent crimes in stores, and gas stations, and restaurants" delusion you have is delusional.shiat happens, but I'm more afraid of some asshole deciding he's gotta stand his ground against a kid in a hoodie or 'shoot back' in some situation hr created playing Dirty Harry and I get caught by friendly fire than I am of finding myself a victim in a bank robbery.You are nuts. Completely paranoid delusional. And a sad example of an adult who still believes the boogie man lives under his bed. Pathetic. Frankly I wouldn't care if not for the fact you are the greatest danger to me and mines safety than any made up fantasy Charleton Heston tripe you believe.

No my name is plural, it refers to a group of other people such as yourself.

I never said I was regularly shot at. I've been shot at twice in my life, one was related to my occupation the second was happenstance. If it should happen a third time I should like to have the proper tools with which to defend myself readily at hand.

We don't generally use the word retard, it is insensitive and shows a lack of adequate vocabulary and a cogent means to express oneself.

I'm fairly certain one of us is nuts, but I don't think it is me.

It is too bad you can't have a civil discourse without insulting people. Have a nice life.

You sound retarded.

welcome_to_f...

Oh nevermind.

Also oh, maybe if some basic gun law reform (no one will take your binky, pinky swear, unless you fail the psych exam, so ok, maybe someone will take your binky) co ...


Oh, you mean like this discussion from last week on Fark, or the countless others to which I won't link.

What 'basic gun law reform' do you want? You don't propose anything, you just insult people. I'm happy to have a rational discussion if you're able.
 
2014-06-26 04:23:06 PM  

feckingmorons: Serious Post on Serious Thread: feckingmorons: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm guessing your screen name is self referential.Where the fark do you shop/live in the US where you are regularly shot at? Do you frequent illegal gambling dens? Whore houses? Chicken fight basements? White supremacist meetings? Ameature bomb making conventions? Retard friendly gun conventions?I mean sweet jebus, I've lived in the worst neighborhoods of NYC, Chicago, Boston and borderline shiatholes of London and Prague. And the "lots of violent crimes in stores, and gas stations, and restaurants" delusion you have is delusional.shiat happens, but I'm more afraid of some asshole deciding he's gotta stand his ground against a kid in a hoodie or 'shoot back' in some situation hr created playing Dirty Harry and I get caught by friendly fire than I am of finding myself a victim in a bank robbery.You are nuts. Completely paranoid delusional. And a sad example of an adult who still believes the boogie man lives under his bed. Pathetic. Frankly I wouldn't care if not for the fact you are the greatest danger to me and mines safety than any made up fantasy Charleton Heston tripe you believe.

No my name is plural, it refers to a group of other people such as yourself.

I never said I was regularly shot at. I've been shot at twice in my life, one was related to my occupation the second was happenstance. If it should happen a third time I should like to have the proper tools with which to defend myself readily at hand.

We don't generally use the word retard, it is insensitive and shows a lack of adequate vocabulary and a cogent means to express oneself.

I'm fairly certain one of us is nuts, but I don't think it is me.

It is too bad you can't have a civil discourse without insulting people. Have a nice life.

You sound retarded.

welcome_to_f...

Oh nevermind.

Also oh, maybe if some basic gun law reform (no one will take your binky, pinky swear, unless you fail the psych exam, so ok, maybe someone will take your binky) co ...

Oh, you mean like this discussion from last week on Fark, or the countless others to which I won't link.

What 'basic gun law reform' do you want? You don't propose anything, you just insult people. I'm happy to have a rational discussion if you're able.


I proposed this up thread already.

There are more. But I'm not digging more at the moment. And as an anticipatory wrote response to your almost certain wrote response: You:"but bad guys won't follow these laws so no laws!"

Me:"So laws against stealing don't stop theft so we shouldn't have those either!"

You know the same crap over and over again. Maybe with more "you can't pass a gun law if you can't field strip and reassemble all firearms blindfolded, with your hands tied behind your back, during a hurricane."
 
2014-06-26 04:24:40 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: feckingmorons: Serious Post on Serious Thread: feckingmorons: Serious Post on Serious Thread: I'm guessing your screen name is self referential.Where the fark do you shop/live in the US where you are regularly shot at? Do you frequent illegal gambling dens? Whore houses? Chicken fight basements? White supremacist meetings? Ameature bomb making conventions? Retard friendly gun conventions?I mean sweet jebus, I've lived in the worst neighborhoods of NYC, Chicago, Boston and borderline shiatholes of London and Prague. And the "lots of violent crimes in stores, and gas stations, and restaurants" delusion you have is delusional.shiat happens, but I'm more afraid of some asshole deciding he's gotta stand his ground against a kid in a hoodie or 'shoot back' in some situation hr created playing Dirty Harry and I get caught by friendly fire than I am of finding myself a victim in a bank robbery.You are nuts. Completely paranoid delusional. And a sad example of an adult who still believes the boogie man lives under his bed. Pathetic. Frankly I wouldn't care if not for the fact you are the greatest danger to me and mines safety than any made up fantasy Charleton Heston tripe you believe.

No my name is plural, it refers to a group of other people such as yourself.

I never said I was regularly shot at. I've been shot at twice in my life, one was related to my occupation the second was happenstance. If it should happen a third time I should like to have the proper tools with which to defend myself readily at hand.

We don't generally use the word retard, it is insensitive and shows a lack of adequate vocabulary and a cogent means to express oneself.

I'm fairly certain one of us is nuts, but I don't think it is me.

It is too bad you can't have a civil discourse without insulting people. Have a nice life.

You sound retarded.

welcome_to_f...

Oh nevermind.

Also oh, maybe if some basic gun law reform (no one will take your binky, pinky swear, unless you fail the psych exam, so ok, maybe someone will take your binky) co ...

Oh, you mean like this discussion from last week on Fark, or the countless others to which I won't link.

What 'basic gun law reform' do you want? You don't propose anything, you just insult people. I'm happy to have a rational discussion if you're able.

I proposed this up thread already.

There are more. But I'm not digging more at the moment. And as an anticipatory wrote response to your almost certain wrote response: You:"but bad guys won't follow these laws so no laws!"

Me:"So laws against stealing don't stop theft so we shouldn't have those either!"

You know the same crap over and over again. Maybe with more "you can't pass a gun law if you can't field strip and reassemble all firearms blindfolded, with your hands tied behind your back, during a hurricane."


Oh, in case you can't control+f

"Strict background checks & mental health screenings, periodic license renewal, strict rules on transfer & sale, a gun registry, mandatory secure storage, high capacity & caliber 'fun guns' stored at a range. (Before the whargarble, yes, I know, mostly unenforcible before hand, like almost ALL laws, but a deterrent factor prospectively, ie, don't take a chance of doing dumb shiat if you might get busted later)."
 
2014-06-26 04:44:12 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: FreakyBunny:  A thousand Bubbas couldn't withstand the might of the American Army. The thought that a few guys with rifles could do much damage to a drone or an Apache is absurd. The whole "we gotta protecer erseffs from the guvernment" doesn't wash.

You're assuming that the American military would open fire on the American people if they refuse to be disarmed.  That's REALLY not a foregone conclusion.  You might want to do a little reading about how the "Zetas" recruit members of the Mexican military, and that's strictly for monetary compensation in a drug cartel, which is about as far away from a Civil Rights issue as you can get.


People should Google the "Oath Keepers." It's a fark ton of police and service people who have taken an oath never to turn their weapons onto civilians, and dessert their respective agencies if they were even given commands that went against the rights of the people.
 
2014-06-26 04:54:20 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: "Strict background checks & mental health screenings, periodic license renewal, strict rules on transfer & sale, a gun registry, mandatory secure storage, high capacity & caliber 'fun guns' stored at a range. (Before the whargarble, yes, I know, mostly unenforcible before hand, like almost ALL laws, but a deterrent factor prospectively, ie, don't take a chance of doing dumb shiat if you might get busted later)."


"Strict background checks & mental health screenings, periodic license renewal, strict rules on transfer & sale, a gun registry, mandatory secure storage, high capacity & caliber 'fun guns' stored at a range. (Before the whargarble, yes, I know, mostly unenforcible before hand, like almost ALL laws, but a deterrent factor prospectively, ie, don't take a chance of doing dumb shiat if you might get busted later)."

Strict background checks, we have those already. Perhaps you want to include private party sales. That is sort of hard to do with a federal law, but I'm not opposed to it. You should be able to transfer a firearm to someone who has a valid FOID, or concealed weapon permit or some similar state issued ID (or a policeman or FBI agent or something like that) without additional screening. You should also be required to keep a bill of sale at your house that can be obtained by Court order. Most responsible gun owners are doing that or using a FFL to assist with the transfer.

Mental health screenings, heck I think that would be fantastic. I'm not sure how we would implement it though. You can't really force people to go to the doctor unless they're already unstable.

What kind of license? There is no federal license. I own a fully automatic machine gun and I have a tax stamp, and I had to fill out forms and papers and send them to the ATF and if I move I have to update them, but there is no license.

I'm all for mandatory secure storage. In Ireland we have that, depending on the number of guns it can be anything from a locked metal box to require a home alarm system and built in vault. Most responsible gun owners are already doing that.

I don't really see how one 30 round magazine is much different from 3 10 round magazines so the whole high capacity thing is a mystery to me. The Newtown murderer used many small magazines. The Virginia Tech murderer did as well I don't research these things but I don't recall anyone using a high capacity magazine. As to high caliber 'fun guns' you really can't shoot a 50 caliber gun at an indoor range that would be equipped for storage. Those have to be shot outdoors. It seems unwise to have a building full of other people's guns because of the danger of theft. If a FFL has a burglary he knows right away and is required to report it to the local police and the ATF. If Bob's gun range has a burglary it may not know for quite some time. If someone broke into my home and forced the safe open and stole a gun I'd know very soon. I think they are better kept securely by the owner.

We have reasonable gun laws. Heck Vermont doesn't require a license to buy a gun, carry a gun, carry a concealed gun, or even prohibit people carrying rifles down Main Street (although few people do except perhaps during hunting season). Vermont has never had any mass shootings.

I think it is critical that states report mental health patients who would be denied under federal law to NCIS so that they truly can be denied. While reporting is up there is little incentive to the states to comply with the law requiring that they report. Federal funding for roads can be cut off if state's don't put up stop signs meeting a specific regulation (the MUTCD) but there is no punishment for states that fail to timely submit those persons who should not be sold firearms because of mental illness.

A law requiring timely reporting, setting uniform criteria for those that must be reported, and fixing a sufficient penalty on states that do not report properly is sorely needed. I'll gladly support any effort to achieve this, heck I'll chip in so we can buy a Congressman.

Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.
 
2014-06-26 05:09:56 PM  

feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.


There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.
 
2014-06-26 05:26:22 PM  

whatshisname: feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.

There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.


Even if you are right, which I do not agree you are, it doesn't matter. My vote goes with my gun rights. It always will. Women can vote with their uteruses, I vote with my gun rights. Most gun owners are the same.
 
2014-06-26 05:38:49 PM  

whatshisname: feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.

There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.


Well we have that pesky old Constitution which says we can have guns. If you want to amend the Constitution have at it, but I don't really see that happening.

Of course Anders Behring Breivik might disagree with you about gun deaths and gun control. In Norway gun ownership is prohibited unless you have a documented need for the gun. That doesn't work either.

It is not a gun problem, it is a lunatic problem.
 
2014-06-26 05:44:35 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: Also oh, maybe if some basic gun law reform (no one will take your binky, pinky swear, unless you fail the psych exam, so ok, maybe someone will take your binky) could be discussed without GUN GRABBER LIBTARDS maybe non pejorative discourse would ensue.


And this is the reason many gun-rights types oppose psych evaluations for firearm possession.  Because the immediate response by the prohibition types is to ratchet up the standards such that your political party, and I'm not talking about KKK here, can be used as evidence that you're disturbed and need to be disarmed.

whatshisname: There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.


Guess what, Mexico has gun laws that are almost as strict as the UK's.  How's that working out for them?  In many ways gun laws are looser in Switzerland, and they don't have the problems that the UK has.

Even in the states, the level of gun control laws compared to violence shows no statistical relevance.

Culture plays a bigger factor, and the USA has always been a lot more violent than the UK.
 
2014-06-26 05:48:42 PM  

whatshisname: It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.


You understand the concept of "substitution", right?

If somebody wants to kill a bunch of people, they'll find a way to do so.  Just ask Tim McVeigh, the 9/11 hijackers, et cetera.
 
2014-06-26 05:51:16 PM  
If you don't like the 2nd Amendment, change it.  There is a mechanism for amending the constitution.  Use it.

Spare us the sophistry of waiting for a Supreme Court to rule that the 2nd Amendment means the opposite of what it clearly means and has meant for a long time.  "Interpreting" an enumerated right out of existing is not a Supreme Court power anyone should be comfortable with.  If that is a tool that is given, don't be too shocked when it is used in a way you don't like.
 
2014-06-26 05:57:51 PM  
feckingmorons:  I think it is critical that states report mental health patients who would be denied under federal law to NCIS so that they truly can be denied.

And how many people who need help will avoid treatment because of the stigmatization and loss of rights that we're looking at?  At least one state is about to implement a statute that will deny people who voluntarily seek outpatient mental health treatment at the first adversarial (as opposed to ex parte) mental health proceeding the legal right to own a firearm.  I WISH I was kidding.
 
2014-06-26 05:58:55 PM  

TerminalEchoes: People should Google the "Oath Keepers."


You missed all the Bundy threads?
 
2014-06-26 06:06:18 PM  

ko_kyi: If you don't like the 2nd Amendment, change it.  There is a mechanism for amending the constitution.  Use it.

Spare us the sophistry of waiting for a Supreme Court to rule that the 2nd Amendment means the opposite of what it clearly means and has meant for a long time.  "Interpreting" an enumerated right out of existing is not a Supreme Court power anyone should be comfortable with.  If that is a tool that is given, don't be too shocked when it is used in a way you don't like.


Shhh....let them keep backing their disastrous hubristic stupidity.  If you'd told me 20 years ago that SCOTUS would rule that the 2nd covered an individual right, and that they'd also incorporate it, I'd have told you "no way in Hell."  The anti-gunners had been getting away with their idiocy for so long that they actually began believing it, and when SCOTUS kicked them in the teeth for it, they doubled down.  I just hope that the constitutionality of the closing of the NFRTR makes it to SCOTUS sometime soon.
 
2014-06-26 06:16:21 PM  

whatshisname: feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.

There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.


The gun laws in other countries are not as restrictive as you think.

We have more restrictive gun laws than many European countries.

You can own full auto machine guns and suppressors bought off the shelf instead of hopping through hoops submitting paperwork and waiting 9 months for a tax stamp and background check like you do here.
 
2014-06-26 07:17:08 PM  

Egoy3k: Gun bans are not intended to stop robberies and nobody thinks that they are. They are intended to prevent liability from falling on the property owner when an angry old fart shoots someone for texting in a theater or some clumsy jackass accidentally shoots someone.


Why would any liability fall on the property owner? If they allow everyone in, they are, in a sense, 'Common Carriers'. (A common carrier is not responsible for what it delivers. You can't arrest the UPS guy for delivering a threatening letter- he doesn't know what it is, he just delivers it, without regard for content.) However, If they try to regulate who can and cannot step on their property, then they become responsible for enforcing that, and if they fail to enforce it and an injury occurs, they could be sued.
 
2014-06-26 07:31:20 PM  

Giltric: Loreweaver: onyxruby: dookdookdook: Fair enough. How about we agree to begin by restricting gun ownership for psychotics, sociopaths, and admitted tea partiers

If someone is crazy enough they shouldn't have a gun than they are crazy enough to be locked in a mental ward as representing a danger to themselves or others. I'm no tea party sympathizer, but the idea of restricting rights based on political party affiliation strikes me as a very nazi like attitude.

Well, considering Tea Party members have demonstrated time and again that they are a danger to the public (good), I'd say it's pretty reasonable to restrict their access on the merits of mental illness.

Which ones do you consider tea party types?

Hell even the instigator of Feinsteins PTSD was not a tea party type. It was a democrat that killed Moscone and Milk.


Nidal Hasan - Ft Hood Shooter: Registered Democrat and Muslim.
Aaron Alexis, Navy Yard shooter - black liberal/Obama voter
Seung-Hui Cho - Virginia Tech shooter: Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff, registered Democrat.
James Holmes - the "Dark Knight"/Colorado shooter: Registered Democrat, staff worker on the Obama campaign, #Occupy guy,progressive liberal, hated Christians.
Amy Bishop, the rabid leftist, killed her colleagues in Alabama, Obama supporter.
Andrew J. Stack, flew plane into IRS building in Texas - Leftist Democrat
James J. Lee who was the "green activist"/ leftist took hostages at Discovery Channel - progressive liberal Democrat.
Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter - Leftist, Marxist.
Ohio bomb plot derps were occupy Wall St leftists.
Harris and Klebold, the Columbine Shooters - families registered Democrats and progressive Leftists.
Lee Harvey Oswald, Socialist, Communist and Democrat - killed Kennedy...
Karl Pierson, Hated the GOP, Christians and was anti gun. (the media even went back and scrubbed their articles where his friends and family described him as radical socialist)


Derptastic job of adding new spin to an old debunked email!   http://jaxairnews.jacksonville.com/news/premium-news/2013-03-14/story / fact-check-email-was-wrong-about-recent-mass-killers-being The Andrew Stack listing was a game attempt at trying to turn a raving anti-income tax conservative into a "leftist democrat"  but if you want to go for the big points for the Big Lie you should have tried to claim that the OKC bombers were Marxists and that JT Ready was a liberal Democrat.
 
2014-06-26 07:39:23 PM  

Giltric: whatshisname: feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.

There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.

The gun laws in other countries are not as restrictive as you think.

We have more restrictive gun laws than many European countries.

You can own full auto machine guns and suppressors bought off the shelf instead of hopping through hoops submitting paperwork and waiting 9 months for a tax stamp and background check like you do here.


Go ahead and name a European country that permits off the shelf sale of fully automatic weapons without a background check or license.  Don't worry, we'll wait.
 
2014-06-26 07:39:39 PM  

stan unusual: Derptastic job of adding new spin to an old debunked email!   http://jaxairnews.jacksonville.com/news/premium-news/2013-03-14/story / fact-check-email-was-wrong-about-recent-mass-killers-being The Andrew Stack listing was a game attempt at trying to turn a raving anti-income tax conservative into a "leftist democrat"  but if you want to go for the big points for the Big Lie you should have tried to claim that the OKC bombers were Marxists and that JT Ready was a liberal Democrat.


Have you read the Joe Stack suicide note? Not real sure how you can get the raving conservative part out of that. The anti-tax part, yes, especially given he flew a plane into an IRS building.
 
2014-06-26 07:42:10 PM  

stan unusual: Giltric: whatshisname: feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.

There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.

The gun laws in other countries are not as restrictive as you think.

We have more restrictive gun laws than many European countries.

You can own full auto machine guns and suppressors bought off the shelf instead of hopping through hoops submitting paperwork and waiting 9 months for a tax stamp and background check like you do here.

Go ahead and name a European country that permits off the shelf sale of fully automatic weapons without a background check or license.  Don't worry, we'll wait.


You can buy suppressors off the shelf in many countries (Italy, Norway, Finland (with weapon permit), Poland). Even England is far more lax with suppressors than the US.

I don't think full-auto machine guns or automatic rifles enjoy that kind of lack of regulation anywhere in Europe.
 
2014-06-26 07:44:14 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: ko_kyi: If you don't like the 2nd Amendment, change it.  There is a mechanism for amending the constitution.  Use it.

Spare us the sophistry of waiting for a Supreme Court to rule that the 2nd Amendment means the opposite of what it clearly means and has meant for a long time.  "Interpreting" an enumerated right out of existing is not a Supreme Court power anyone should be comfortable with.  If that is a tool that is given, don't be too shocked when it is used in a way you don't like.

Shhh....let them keep backing their disastrous hubristic stupidity.  If you'd told me 20 years ago that SCOTUS would rule that the 2nd covered an individual right, and that they'd also incorporate it, I'd have told you "no way in Hell."  The anti-gunners had been getting away with their idiocy for so long that they actually began believing it, and when SCOTUS kicked them in the teeth for it, they doubled down.  I just hope that the constitutionality of the closing of the NFRTR makes it to SCOTUS sometime soon.


How's that gun registration is the first step towards confiscation and banned by the Second Amendment " sophistry working for you?
 
2014-06-26 07:44:57 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: feckingmorons:  I think it is critical that states report mental health patients who would be denied under federal law to NCIS so that they truly can be denied.

And how many people who need help will avoid treatment because of the stigmatization and loss of rights that we're looking at?  At least one state is about to implement a statute that will deny people who voluntarily seek outpatient mental health treatment at the first adversarial (as opposed to ex parte) mental health proceeding the legal right to own a firearm.  I WISH I was kidding.


Yep, that is part of the problem. If mental health treatment becomes a bar then people will avoid mental health care. If an appendectomy became a bar people would avoid that as well with just as serious consequences. Mental illness is as much an illness as appendicitis and medical care can be just as effective. This is where we need rational non-discriminatory uniform regulations regarding reporting of mental health disqualifications. Look at California where a special police squad exists to confiscate firearms. They recently confiscated (but thankfully returned) firearms from the husband of a woman who voluntarily sought mental health care. Just to be clear, a special police squad to take guns of people who voluntarily seek medical care. They can locate these people because there is a mandatory registration of all guns in California. This is not helping. The people on the list of disqualified due to mental illness need to have a mechanism to remove themselves from the list. There must be an appeals process that allows for due process. We can't simply send special police out to cajole innocent relatives or people who seek medical care until they give up their guns. California does that.
 
2014-06-26 07:46:46 PM  

fredklein: Egoy3k: Gun bans are not intended to stop robberies and nobody thinks that they are. They are intended to prevent liability from falling on the property owner when an angry old fart shoots someone for texting in a theater or some clumsy jackass accidentally shoots someone.

Why would any liability fall on the property owner? If they allow everyone in, they are, in a sense, 'Common Carriers'. (A common carrier is not responsible for what it delivers. You can't arrest the UPS guy for delivering a threatening letter- he doesn't know what it is, he just delivers it, without regard for content.) However, If they try to regulate who can and cannot step on their property, then they become responsible for enforcing that, and if they fail to enforce it and an injury occurs, they could be sued.


I see you've never met a trial lawyer. They'll sue for anything. They look for deep pockets, not actual liability.
 
2014-06-26 07:57:38 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: You understand the concept of "substitution", right?

If somebody wants to kill a bunch of people, they'll find a way to do so. Just ask Tim McVeigh, the 9/11 hijackers, et cetera.


In other countries most mentally ill people just jump off the bridge or OD on pills. Very few of them have the opportunity to grab a gun and start shooting. And they aren't surrounded by a huge industry and culture which glorifies guns. If your theory had any legs then we'd be seeing frequent mass stabbings and poisonings and bombings by criminals and crazy people in countries where guns are less available. And we don't. It's the guns.

feckingmorons: Of course Anders Behring Breivik might disagree with you about gun deaths and gun control. In Norway gun ownership is prohibited unless you have a documented need for the gun. That doesn't work either.


Well, thank you for selecting one highly unusual incident and trying to compare it to something that happens weekly in the US. People who really want anything will find it. And people who are absolutely surrounded by and desensitized to something will use it without really thinking about the consequences. If America was not awash in guns, with gun shops and gun shows and firing ranges and gun magazines and advertising and heavy lobbying from the gun industry financing your local politician's re-election, and the NRA, do you think people would turn to guns so quickly?
 
2014-06-26 08:01:33 PM  

stan unusual: Giltric: whatshisname: feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.

There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.

The gun laws in other countries are not as restrictive as you think.

We have more restrictive gun laws than many European countries.

You can own full auto machine guns and suppressors bought off the shelf instead of hopping through hoops submitting paperwork and waiting 9 months for a tax stamp and background check like you do here.

Go ahead and name a European country that permits off the shelf sale of fully automatic weapons without a background check or license.  Don't worry, we'll wait.


You realize that you can't buy a fully automatic weapon in the US 'off the shelf' right?

I have one and there was quite a regulatory and tax burden.
 
2014-06-26 08:22:28 PM  

feckingmorons: stan unusual: Giltric: whatshisname: feckingmorons: Guns aren't the problem, guns in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill are the problem. If we can stop that we will have made a substantial dent in gun crime, and gun related murders.

There are criminal and mentally ill people everywhere. Guess what? In countries where they don't have free and easy access to guns, gun crimes and deaths are a fraction of what they are in the US.

It's a gun problem. And to try and ignore it by pointing at something else is just willful ignorance.

The gun laws in other countries are not as restrictive as you think.

We have more restrictive gun laws than many European countries.

You can own full auto machine guns and suppressors bought off the shelf instead of hopping through hoops submitting paperwork and waiting 9 months for a tax stamp and background check like you do here.

Go ahead and name a European country that permits off the shelf sale of fully automatic weapons without a background check or license.  Don't worry, we'll wait.

You realize that you can't buy a fully automatic weapon in the US 'off the shelf' right?

I have one and there was quite a regulatory and tax burden.


That wasn't what you claimed and even if you try to backfill by claiming that "off the shelf" applied only to suppressors your claim that you laws in Europe regarding fully auto machine guns are less restrictive than ours fails.  There is just as much, if not more,  paperwork, taxes and background checks to be done in those countries and unlike the US those laws usually require a showing of need.  But if you can name an example of a European country that permits its citizens to purchase a fully automatic weapon without a background check for their private use, I'm all ears.  I'll save you some time though- Switzerland does permit militia members to purchase their STG's after they leave the service, but only after they are converted to semi-auto action only.
 
Displayed 50 of 377 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all


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