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.

(NewsBusters)   88% of FoxNews.com readers support the right for people to carry guns in public...oh, sorry.. I meant MSNBC.com readers   (newsbusters.org ) divider line
    More: Strange, prisoner swap  
•       •       •

2701 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Aug 2014 at 9:38 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-07 10:19:17 AM  

Great_Milenko: Trailltrader: Prog's have been told this over and over again.  And you still don't believe it.

OK so lets try this real world example: someone in your family gets mugged, and afterwards you think "Gee, if I'd only had a gun".

Welcome to the NRA, we've been protecting your firearm rights since 1889, and we're the oldest civil rights organization in the world.

Welcome to closing the barn door after the horse is gone.  What is the point of buying a gun after a mugging, except to sooth hurt feelings and build self-esteem, two things that conservatives just love.



That's is why you buy the gun BEFORE the mugging
 
2014-08-07 10:19:33 AM  
88% of FoxNews.com readers support the right for people to carry guns in public...oh, sorry.. I meant MSNBC.com readers people who voted in a poll on MSNBC.com

FTFSubby. Most of them probably don't even visit MSNBC.com except to stuff the online ballot box.

enry: Lemme guess. This was a online poll. Wonder if info about the poll got passed around sites where those concerned about 'gun rights' might have found out and been a bit over represented.

This is absolutely one of the ways the right "works the refs." Convince thousands of drones to vote anonymously in these polls, then turn around and cite the results as proof that the people agree with this.
 
2014-08-07 10:19:46 AM  
I believe that people have a right to. I just think it's paranoid and stupid and that the true reasons behind the open carry movement have more to do with them getting a kick out of the fear and discomfort it causes regular citizens. I also think private property owners have a right to tell you to stow it before stepping on to said property. I certainly wouldn't want someone with a dick compensator (yeah yeah, Malarkey's Law, fark off. It's not a thing. It'll never be a thing.) hanging on their person in my house.

In short, I don't think open carry nutters are wrong, Constitutionally speaking, they're just assholes.
 
2014-08-07 10:20:00 AM  
I don't care if people carry. I care they they know how to do it safely and effectively.

img.fark.netThese two assholes are using their rifles as protest signs. Any unarmed person could easily get the jump on them, and turn their protest signs against them. They aren't treating their weapons with the respect they require.

I bet both of them have have broken muzzle discipline, and pointed their weapons at people(even just their feet).
 
2014-08-07 10:20:03 AM  

grokca: Liberals, now in prog form.


it's like regular liberal but with a bunch of noodly guitar solos that go nowhere
 
2014-08-07 10:20:58 AM  

enry: dittybopper: enry: And the NRA doesn't represent gun owners. It represents gun manufacturers.

False.

The NSSF represents gun manufacturers.  The NRA represents gun owners.

But don't take it from me, take it from that well-known right-wing mouthpiece NPR:

http://www.npr.org/2013/03/15/174383213/how-close-are-the-nra-and-gu nm akers-really

It's becoming almost conventional wisdom that the reason the NRA goes to such extremes is that it is driven by the gun industry. And in fact, that understanding is just incorrect. If anything, it is the NRA that sets the terms of the debate and the gun industry basically obediently follows along.

Now, the gun industry most certainly does benefit from the NRA, but the idea that the gun manufacturers call the shots and the NRA dances to their tune is exactly the opposite of the real relationship.

Again, I never made the claim of who calls the shots or who got funding from where.  I merely said that the NRA represents gun manufacturers.  And the NPR article merely serves to prove that statement since the gun manufacturers are following the lead of the NRA.


Man, that's some cognitive dissonance you've got going on there.

"The NRA represents gun manufacturers, even though the NRA calls all the shots, but it's *TOTALLY* a puppet of the gun industry".

The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the lobbying group that represents firearms manufacturers.  The NRA is the lobbying group of gun *OWNERS*.
 
2014-08-07 10:21:02 AM  

Dimensio: bdub77: AngryDragon: You have lost.  Get over it.

[jpfo.org image 500x377]

One of the great things about our country is that we can change laws. And the world is ever so slowly moving away from violence as a means to an end.

So. Get over it.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 368x254]

You are clearly making progress in repealing the right to carry.


No one said anything about progress in the respect of gun laws, but demographics change, public opinion changes, and the only loser is the person who can't understand that.
 
2014-08-07 10:21:06 AM  
Because only a lefty libby mclib would answer a poll on msnbc.com. No way could conservatives possibly answer it. That's never, ever happened before, ever.
 
2014-08-07 10:21:55 AM  

enry: You can call it a hit piece, but that doesn't change the basic facts, which you have yet to refute with any amount of evidence. If the NRA were really representative of its members it would be in favor of background checks for all gun sales, which is supported by 74% of NRA members. But NRA leadership is firmly against that. Who stands to lose from reduced gun sales?


Gun manufacturers care about new gun sales.  Banning private sales would primarily affect the secondary market.  It would have no effect on new guns, which all require NICS checks at the point of sale.  And sure, 74% of NRA members support background checks for all gun sales.  That's before the antis add whatever poison pill they want to a new background check bill while failing to open up the NICS to non-FFLs.
 
2014-08-07 10:21:59 AM  

born_yesterday: Jesus Christ; laying it on a little thick in the profile, aren't you?


Holy crap look at this rapist mantra "Remember, you get more cooperation with a gun and a smile than you do just the smile alone!"
 
2014-08-07 10:22:19 AM  
As i have been assured by Farkers that gun ownership equates to small penises.

All this poll does is show how many small penises there are in the liberal community.
 
2014-08-07 10:22:45 AM  

Fark It: enry: Fark It: enry: Lemme guess. This was a online poll. Wonder if info about the poll got passed around sites where those concerned about 'gun rights' might have found out and been a bit over represented.

And the NRA doesn't represent gun owners. It represents gun manufacturers.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation represents gun manufacturers, their literature actually comes with most new guns in this country.  The NRA represents ~5% of gun owners (yet has become a convenient, pejorative way to refer to anyone who doesn't espouse any and all gun control proposals from Bloomberg et. al....).  The NSSF represents gun manufacturers.

Uh huh. You keep believing that. You're wrong, but go right ahead.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is a national trade association for the firearms industry

The NRA gets a small chunk of its money from industry groups, including the firearms industry, as well as other sporting goods:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association#Finances


From that link:

Finances
Less than half of the NRA's income is from membership dues and program fees. The majority is from contributions, grants, royalties, and advertising, and the firearms industry.
 
2014-08-07 10:24:35 AM  

Chris Ween: nocturnal001: So this assumes that all/most readers of MSNBC.com are lefties.

Stupid article is stupid.

You would assume that the ones who can read are lefties.


To be fair they probably aren't reading, more likely just scanning the headline and posting angry things about Obama in the comments.
 
2014-08-07 10:25:02 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-08-07 10:25:16 AM  

sprawl15: grokca: Liberals, now in prog form.

it's like regular liberal but with a bunch of noodly guitar solos that go nowhere


Where are my 360 degrees of drums Obama
 
2014-08-07 10:25:19 AM  

eagles95: caramel macchiato


That shiat is nasty.

Fark It: Open carriers are the bronies of the gun rights world. Sure, you can do it, but people are going to shield their kids from you and keep an eye on you until you leave the area.


I went to a street fair last Saturday. Lo and behold, a guy was open carrying at the parade (holstered Sig). Nobody shunned him, we and other families all lined up near him let our kids grab candy in front of him. Nobody got shot. Was he the only one carrying a gun besides the cops? Certainly not. Of the thousands of people at the fair, did he look the douchiest with his short pants, American flag iphone case, and sidearm? Absolutely. In a way I felt sorry for him. I questioned myself- if I felt the need to carry (I have a CHL) at my homecoming why would I even go?
 
2014-08-07 10:25:59 AM  

Publikwerks: I don't care if people carry. I care they they know how to do it safely and effectively.

[img.fark.net image 850x478]These two assholes are using their rifles as protest signs. Any unarmed person could easily get the jump on them, and turn their protest signs against them. They aren't treating their weapons with the respect they require.

I bet both of them have have broken muzzle discipline, and pointed their weapons at people(even just their feet).


All of this, right here.  These guys should be an embarrassment to any gun owner; I know they are to me.
 
2014-08-07 10:26:02 AM  

revrendjim: I'm a liberal gun owner who used to be an NRA member but quit 10 years ago when they went insane.


Ditto, when they started supporting republican candidates with worse gun rights record over blue dog democrats with a solid record I canceled my membership, there are other gun rights and conservation groups that can better use my money and support.
 
2014-08-07 10:26:49 AM  

Publikwerks: I don't care if people carry. I care they they know how to do it safely and effectively.

[img.fark.net image 850x478]These two assholes are using their rifles as protest signs. Any unarmed person could easily get the jump on them, and turn their protest signs against them. They aren't treating their weapons with the respect they require.

I bet both of them have have broken muzzle discipline, and pointed their weapons at people(even just their feet).


The one on the left is a girl and they are buying donuts....how bad can they be?
 
2014-08-07 10:27:00 AM  

Latinwolf: Fark It: enry: Fark It: enry: Lemme guess. This was a online poll. Wonder if info about the poll got passed around sites where those concerned about 'gun rights' might have found out and been a bit over represented.

And the NRA doesn't represent gun owners. It represents gun manufacturers.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation represents gun manufacturers, their literature actually comes with most new guns in this country.  The NRA represents ~5% of gun owners (yet has become a convenient, pejorative way to refer to anyone who doesn't espouse any and all gun control proposals from Bloomberg et. al....).  The NSSF represents gun manufacturers.

Uh huh. You keep believing that. You're wrong, but go right ahead.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is a national trade association for the firearms industry

The NRA gets a small chunk of its money from industry groups, including the firearms industry, as well as other sporting goods:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association#Finances

From that link:

Finances
Less than half of the NRA's income is from membership dues and program fees. The majority is from contributions, grants, royalties, and advertising, and the firearms industry.


How much does the "firearms industry" give to the NRA?  How much of that is in the form of the NRA's "round-up" campaign through retailers, which in reality is from individual customers?

/
 
2014-08-07 10:27:36 AM  

dittybopper: enry: dittybopper: enry: And the NRA doesn't represent gun owners. It represents gun manufacturers.

False.

The NSSF represents gun manufacturers.  The NRA represents gun owners.

But don't take it from me, take it from that well-known right-wing mouthpiece NPR:

http://www.npr.org/2013/03/15/174383213/how-close-are-the-nra-and-gu nm akers-really

It's becoming almost conventional wisdom that the reason the NRA goes to such extremes is that it is driven by the gun industry. And in fact, that understanding is just incorrect. If anything, it is the NRA that sets the terms of the debate and the gun industry basically obediently follows along.

Now, the gun industry most certainly does benefit from the NRA, but the idea that the gun manufacturers call the shots and the NRA dances to their tune is exactly the opposite of the real relationship.

Again, I never made the claim of who calls the shots or who got funding from where.  I merely said that the NRA represents gun manufacturers.  And the NPR article merely serves to prove that statement since the gun manufacturers are following the lead of the NRA.

Man, that's some cognitive dissonance you've got going on there.

"The NRA represents gun manufacturers, even though the NRA calls all the shots, but it's *TOTALLY* a puppet of the gun industry".

The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the lobbying group that represents firearms manufacturers.  The NRA is the lobbying group of gun *OWNERS*.


You have some serious reading comprehension problems.


Until that comment, I never said who was a puppet of whom.  And it doesn't matter.  The NRA represents gun manufacturers.  And I'll make this a bit clearer for you:  If you go out and ask a dozen random people who represents gun manufacturers, you'll get over eight that say it's the NRA and maybe one or two that has heard of the NSSF.  If anything, it means that the NSSF is doing a crappy job, or they just leave it to the NRA to do it for them.  Either way, the NSSF is not representing gun manufacturers, the NRA is.
 
2014-08-07 10:28:26 AM  
Latinwolf: Less than half of the NRA's income is from membership dues and program fees. The majority is from contributions, grants, royalties, and advertising, and the firearms industry.
 
2014-08-07 10:28:38 AM  

karnal: Epic Fap Session: karnal: TwistedIvory: Once again:

http://www.theliberalgunclub.com/

There are more of us out there than you think.

Maybe we should start a database.

This is what derpers projecting their fears onto others looks like.

Go ahead.


Looks as if someone projected their derp all over your face. Here's a tissue.  Clean yourself up.


Sick burn. I bet you're the funniest guy in detention.

Only paranoid people think there is any possible scenario where "leftists" come for your guns. It is a delusion you share with many other nut bags.
 
2014-08-07 10:29:42 AM  

enry: Lemme guess. This was a online poll. Wonder if info about the poll got passed around sites where those concerned about 'gun rights' might have found out and been a bit over represented.

And the NRA doesn't represent gun owners. It represents gun manufacturers.


Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
Bears
 
2014-08-07 10:30:08 AM  

qorkfiend: AngryDragon: dookdookdook: Conservatives are highly overrepresented online, even on "liberal" sites.  Something about near total anonymity seems to attract people who love to spout hateful, anti-social garbage.


Trailltrader: Prog's have been told this over and over again. And you still don't believe it.

Told what?  That we must be pants-shiattingly terrified of everything and everybody in the world around us at all times and spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to arm ourselves against the infinitesimal chance that something bad will happen to us that guns could solve instead of make worse?

You have lost.  Get over it.

[jpfo.org image 500x377]

You are aware this isn't a competition, yes?


I am.

I'm also aware that the constant drive by many liberals to enact more gun laws, despite the country clearly being in favor of the lawful ownership and carrying of them, has a parallel.  That parallel is the retarded push to ban and restrict abortion and other reproductive rights by many conservatives.

They are both the law of the land.  The people have spoken, let's move on.
 
2014-08-07 10:30:11 AM  

Fark It: How much does the "firearms industry" give to the NRA?  How much of that is in the form of the NRA's "round-up" campaign through retailers, which in reality is from individual customers?


FTF Huff Po (bold by me):

While the bond between the NRA and the gun industry has tightened, the NRA's annual budget of about $250 million is still largely derived from other sources, including membership dues, merchandising and ads in NRA magazines. The magazines, though, are chock-full of gun industry ads.
 
2014-08-07 10:30:36 AM  
I'm a gun owner. To me, the NRA is just one more organization that claims to speak for me, and doesn't. Like the Klan, or Men's Rights advocates.
 
2014-08-07 10:31:25 AM  

dobro: 88% of those polled don't understand the second amendment. It says nothing about carrying in public, open or concealed, and only guarantees the right of ownership for the purposes of a "well regulated militia".


1/10 you might have had something with the first sentence but you completely blew it with the second.
 
2014-08-07 10:31:32 AM  

dookdookdook: Conservatives are highly overrepresented online, even on "liberal" sites.  Something about near total anonymity seems to attract people who love to spout hateful, anti-social garbage.



More like hate is overrepresented online.  Look at all of the anti-semetic shiat being circlejerked all over Reddit these past few weeks, for instance
 
2014-08-07 10:31:45 AM  

enry: You have some serious reading comprehension problems.


Until that comment, I never said who was a puppet of whom. And it doesn't matter. The NRA represents gun manufacturers. And I'll make this a bit clearer for you: If you go out and ask a dozen random people who represents gun manufacturers, you'll get over eight that say it's the NRA and maybe one or two that has heard of the NSSF. If anything, it means that the NSSF is doing a crappy job, or they just leave it to the NRA to do it for them. Either way, the NSSF is not representing gun manufacturers, the NRA is.


I guess that settles it then.  Assuming you're correct, what does this mean exactly, other than that in the past, gun control activists targeted the gun industry when their efforts to target gun owners were stymied/not moving along fast enough?
 
2014-08-07 10:31:56 AM  

Epic Fap Session: karnal: Epic Fap Session: karnal: TwistedIvory: Once again:

http://www.theliberalgunclub.com/

There are more of us out there than you think.

Maybe we should start a database.

This is what derpers projecting their fears onto others looks like.

Go ahead.


Looks as if someone projected their derp all over your face. Here's a tissue.  Clean yourself up.

Sick burn. I bet you're the funniest guy in detention.

Only paranoid people think there is any possible scenario where "leftists" come for your guns. It is a delusion you share with many other nut bags.


Ok Ok....it's kind of hard to have a serious conversation with you when you have that derp all over your face....wipe it off and then we can talk.
 
2014-08-07 10:32:50 AM  

dookdookdook: Conservatives are highly overrepresented online, even on "liberal" sites.  Something about near total anonymity seems to attract people who love to spout hateful, anti-social garbage.


Trailltrader: Prog's have been told this over and over again. And you still don't believe it.

Told what?  That we must be pants-shiattingly terrified of everything and everybody in the world around us at all times and spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to arm ourselves against the infinitesimal chance that something bad will happen to us that guns could solve instead of make worse?


you libs keep saying this but then turn around and say we have to ban guns because guns are running amok in the streets slaughtering children. so, which is it?
 
2014-08-07 10:33:12 AM  

bdub77: AngryDragon: You have lost.  Get over it.

[jpfo.org image 500x377]

One of the great things about our country is that we can change laws. And the world is ever so slowly moving away from violence as a means to an end.

So. Get over it.


Riiiiiiiiight
 
2014-08-07 10:33:26 AM  

enry: Fark It: How much does the "firearms industry" give to the NRA?  How much of that is in the form of the NRA's "round-up" campaign through retailers, which in reality is from individual customers?

FTF Huff Po (bold by me):

While the bond between the NRA and the gun industry has tightened, the NRA's annual budget of about $250 million is still largely derived from other sources, including membership dues, merchandising and ads in NRA magazines. The magazines, though, are chock-full of gun industry ads.


I asked "how much," not "what do magazines have?"
 
2014-08-07 10:33:52 AM  

sprawl15: grokca: Liberals, now in prog form.

it's like regular liberal but with a bunch of noodly guitar solos that go nowhere


And orchestra hits.


/owner of a compact Glock
//much better than a
 
2014-08-07 10:34:37 AM  
It's almost as if MSNBC readers, let's refer to them as 'liberals' for the point of this discussion, aren't willing to take away all your guns.
 
2014-08-07 10:35:12 AM  

Fark It: enry: You have some serious reading comprehension problems.


Until that comment, I never said who was a puppet of whom. And it doesn't matter. The NRA represents gun manufacturers. And I'll make this a bit clearer for you: If you go out and ask a dozen random people who represents gun manufacturers, you'll get over eight that say it's the NRA and maybe one or two that has heard of the NSSF. If anything, it means that the NSSF is doing a crappy job, or they just leave it to the NRA to do it for them. Either way, the NSSF is not representing gun manufacturers, the NRA is.

I guess that settles it then.  Assuming you're correct, what does this mean exactly, other than that in the past, gun control activists targeted the gun industry when their efforts to target gun owners were stymied/not moving along fast enough?


Wat
 
2014-08-07 10:36:18 AM  

doublesecretprobation: what to "carry a gun in public" means....

To "leftists/libtards/progs":

[d1odfg5a9rhrg8.cloudfront.net image 480x467]

To "conservatives":

[a57.foxnews.com image 850x478]


THIS. I have no issue with carrying guns in public. My brother (24 years cop) does it every day, even off-duty. He just isn't an asshole about it. He is a trained officer and trains other officers on the firing range, and requires his weapon because of the people he has to deal with. What he is not is some second amendment nutjob who has to make up for a lack of adequate genitalia with a gun.

He's also planning to retire this year and move out of state, and you know what he's going to do with the three guns he has? He's going to sell them and never purchase another one again. They are part of his job, not his life.
 
2014-08-07 10:36:39 AM  

Trailltrader: OK so lets try this real world example: someone in your family gets mugged comes out gay, and afterwards you think "Gee, if I'd only had a gun I guess all homos aren't demon-loving sociopaths bend on converting your children".

 
2014-08-07 10:36:42 AM  
"Do you support firearms?"
"Yes."
"How about like if I was hunting some deer."
"Sure."
"Or like shooting some pheasants with a gun."
"Yeah that's fine."
"Or like public carry at the gun range."
"Sure."
"Do you support public carry of firearms?"
"I suppose."
"How about like I'm on the street, just walking around with a weapon."
"Well, umm, I guess that's OK."
"How about like at the mall or grocery store?"
"Why do you need a gun at the mall?"
"Just in case one of them uppity blacks starts shooting people."
"What?
"OK, what if I had a large assault-style rifle, a big barreled gun in your supermarket?"
"I don't know."
"It's semi-automatic. It's not a REAL assault rifle hahaha. It's not an uzi. Come on. Just me. You know me. Hypothetically."
"Umm."
"What if I was at a bar. You know, I'd never drink at a bar, I'd just be walking around with my assault rifle making sure no fights break out."
"Huh?"
"What about if I brought it to your place of work?"
"I think we should stop talking."
"How about if I was at your kid's school? With a gun, you know, on my person. It could be a pistol. I have to admit it'd probably be a big ol assault rifle though."
"No, God no."
"How about if I came over for dinner and I had a big gun on me."
"I don't like where this is heading."
"What about if I was in your closet, carrying a firearm, while you were sleeping? You know, for protection."
"I don't want to talk to you anymore."
"Fine lady. What if I had it held up to your head sort of sideways like?"
"Go away from me!"
"What if I shot you in the face and blood spattered all over your head but I needed to because the apocalypse came and Jesus had returned for the Rapture and the world was all Mad Max and only the strong survive so f*ck everyone! WHAT THEN?"
 
2014-08-07 10:36:48 AM  

dookdookdook: Conservatives are highly overrepresented online, even on "liberal" sites.  Something about near total anonymity seems to attract people who love to spout hateful, anti-social garbage.


Trailltrader: Prog's have been told this over and over again. And you still don't believe it.

Told what?  That we must be pants-shiattingly terrified of everything and everybody in the world around us at all times and spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to arm ourselves against the infinitesimal chance that something bad will happen to us that guns could solve instead of make worse?


Yes, Fark is a perfect example of Conservatives being over represented online......
 
2014-08-07 10:36:58 AM  

Lord_Baull: It's almost as if MSNBC readers, let's refer to them as 'liberals' for the point of this discussion, aren't willing to take away all your guns.


It's almost as if the right wing always proves their own detractors' points for them.
 
2014-08-07 10:37:30 AM  

dobro: 88% of those polled don't understand the second amendment. It says nothing about carrying in public, open or concealed, and only guarantees the right of ownership for the purposes of a "well regulated militia".


<notsureifserious.jpg>
 
2014-08-07 10:39:05 AM  

bdub77: "Do you support firearms?"
"Yes."
"How about like if I was hunting some deer."
"Sure."
"Or like shooting some pheasants with a gun."
"Yeah that's fine."
"Or like public carry at the gun range."
"Sure."
"Do you support public carry of firearms?"
"I suppose."
"How about like I'm on the street, just walking around with a weapon."
"Well, umm, I guess that's OK."
"How about like at the mall or grocery store?"
"Why do you need a gun at the mall?"
"Just in case one of them uppity blacks starts shooting people."
"What?
"OK, what if I had a large assault-style rifle, a big barreled gun in your supermarket?"
"I don't know."
"It's semi-automatic. It's not a REAL assault rifle hahaha. It's not an uzi. Come on. Just me. You know me. Hypothetically."
"Umm."
"What if I was at a bar. You know, I'd never drink at a bar, I'd just be walking around with my assault rifle making sure no fights break out."
"Huh?"
"What about if I brought it to your place of work?"
"I think we should stop talking."
"How about if I was at your kid's school? With a gun, you know, on my person. It could be a pistol. I have to admit it'd probably be a big ol assault rifle though."
"No, God no."
"How about if I came over for dinner and I had a big gun on me."
"I don't like where this is heading."
"What about if I was in your closet, carrying a firearm, while you were sleeping? You know, for protection."
"I don't want to talk to you anymore."
"Fine lady. What if I had it held up to your head sort of sideways like?"
"Go away from me!"
"What if I shot you in the face and blood spattered all over your head but I needed to because the apocalypse came and Jesus had returned for the Rapture and the world was all Mad Max and only the strong survive so f*ck everyone! WHAT THEN?"


GUN GRABBER!
 
2014-08-07 10:39:41 AM  

Trailltrader: Welcome to the NRA, we've been protecting your firearm rights since 1889, and we're the oldest civil rights organization in the world.



Frowns on your shenanigans
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-08-07 10:40:43 AM  

dittybopper: The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the lobbying group that represents firearms manufacturers.  The NRA is the lobbying group of gun *OWNERS*.


Repetition isn't argument. No matter how many times you repeat your claim, it remains nonsense.
 
2014-08-07 10:41:01 AM  

thamike: Lord_Baull: It's almost as if MSNBC readers, let's refer to them as 'liberals' for the point of this discussion, aren't willing to take away all your guns.

It's almost as if the right wing always proves their own detractors' points for them.



It's almost as if the right wing is laughable, and can't make a salient, honest talking point to save their lives.
 
2014-08-07 10:41:12 AM  

Trailltrader: Prog's have been told this over and over again.  And you still don't believe it.

OK so lets try this real world example: someone in your family gets mugged, and afterwards you think "Gee, if I'd only had a gun".

Welcome to the NRA, we've been protecting your firearm rights since 1889, and we're the oldest civil rights organization in the world.


Yeah, fark the NRA.

/gun owner.
 
2014-08-07 10:41:26 AM  
So weird - I have the guy farkied with the comment Angry Zionist Derp. Guess I can add "juvenile obsession with sperm" to the dossier.

Meh... He adds nothing to any thread

Kerfavorited!!
 
2014-08-07 10:41:28 AM  

Publikwerks: I don't care if people carry. I care they they know how to do it safely and effectively.

[img.fark.net image 850x478]These two assholes are using their rifles as protest signs. Any unarmed person could easily get the jump on them, and turn their protest signs against them. They aren't treating their weapons with the respect they require.

I bet both of them have have broken muzzle discipline, and pointed their weapons at people(even just their feet).


Hell, it wouldn't be that tough to come up behind someone with a back-slung rifle and release their magazine before they could react.
 
Displayed 50 of 547 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | 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