Skip to content
 
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.

(Bearing Arms)   Sen. Diane Feinstein rolls out her gun control bill. This year she wants to outlaw the round thing with holes in it, bullet holder doohickies, the shoulder thing that flips up, and of course the umbrella stand thingy on the back that goes in and out   (bearingarms.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Assault rifle, Democratic Party, Federal Assault Weapons Ban, United States Senate, assault weapon ban, Dianne Feinstein, detachable magazine, Assault weapon  
•       •       •

1669 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Jan 2019 at 3:50 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2019-01-10 3:25:45 PM  
See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**
 
2019-01-10 3:28:12 PM  
Sounds exactly like Republicans and taxes.
 
2019-01-10 3:28:15 PM  
Knowing the difference between a clip and a magazine makes you immune to the bullets
 
2019-01-10 3:28:41 PM  
Ha! You said CLIP instead of MAGAZINE, invalidating all your data and conclusions!
 
2019-01-10 3:29:31 PM  
also, I'm sure the commentary from bearingarms.com will be totally reasonable.

/rolls eyes
 
2019-01-10 3:29:54 PM  
I was at a mass shooting but I didn't know that a clip was a magazine so the bullets couldn't hurt me.
 
2019-01-10 3:33:30 PM  
But the thing in the stock that tells time is still OK, right?
 
2019-01-10 3:35:47 PM  

HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**


I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?
 
2019-01-10 3:36:53 PM  
i question whomever thought this should be greenlit.
 
2019-01-10 3:37:07 PM  

Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?


**wanking motion**
 
2019-01-10 3:37:09 PM  

Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?


Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.
 
2019-01-10 3:37:49 PM  

Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?


Nobody expected politicians to know the details of how to build and configure a network switch.

But they understand that guns are designed to kill people.
 
2019-01-10 3:39:21 PM  
 
2019-01-10 3:39:42 PM  

HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**


No positive comments. Check
Negative link vote score. Check
Greened regardless.... check
 
2019-01-10 3:40:50 PM  

HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**


Like Republican want to regulate the moist oven thing with one hole?
 
2019-01-10 3:40:55 PM  

thehobbes: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

No positive comments. Check
Negative link vote score. Check
Greened regardless.... check


The liters should get a taste of the good parts of TF
 
2019-01-10 3:42:14 PM  
But yeesh. Talk about a biased article.
 
2019-01-10 3:44:06 PM  
Subby's one of the fire arms fetishists that just can't stand when anyone else isn't a Ph.D level gunsmith. There's one...or ten, in every 2nd Amendment discussion thread. F*cking loosers.
 
2019-01-10 3:45:34 PM  
Imagine a scenario where the gun humpers' favorite president declares a national emergency over immigration as it seems he will thereby giving precedent for President Kamala Harris to do the same about guns.
 
2019-01-10 3:45:34 PM  

Thundrull: Subby's one of the fire arms fetishists that just can't stand when anyone else isn't a Ph.D level gunsmith. There's one...or ten, in every 2nd Amendment discussion thread. F*cking loosers.


who's been given a greenlight, which means someone in fark world thought this deserved more exposure.
:(
 
2019-01-10 3:45:46 PM  

FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.


Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.
 
2019-01-10 3:46:22 PM  

Thundrull: Subby's one of the fire arms fetishists that just can't stand when anyone else isn't a Ph.D level gunsmith. There's one...or ten, in every 2nd Amendment discussion thread. F*cking loosers.


idk. I mean, on one hand it's not that hard to look something up for an hour so it sounds like you know what you're talking about.
 
2019-01-10 3:49:06 PM  

Luse: FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.

Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.


Cosmetic features that let you go pew-pew at little kids easier.
 
2019-01-10 3:49:15 PM  

KangTheMad: Thundrull: Subby's one of the fire arms fetishists that just can't stand when anyone else isn't a Ph.D level gunsmith. There's one...or ten, in every 2nd Amendment discussion thread. F*cking loosers.

idk. I mean, on one hand it's not that hard to look something up for an hour so it sounds like you know what you're talking about.


You'd think that'd be a requirement when making laws about said thing that will impact millions of people yet clearly many are against the very concept.
 
2019-01-10 3:51:30 PM  
The old pretending not to be a Republican bill that she wouldn't ever introduce if it had a chance.
 
2019-01-10 3:52:01 PM  
The one feature test seems a little...odd, as you could have a .22 threaded for a silencer be considered an assault weapon which is...silly.
 
2019-01-10 3:52:05 PM  
"Yer lives < mah toys"
 
2019-01-10 3:52:40 PM  
Dnrtfa.

Knowing the details isn't necessary to take a general stance favoring gun control.

It is kind of important when drafting legislation. Otherwise you may end up with arbitrary and toothless legislation. Or worse, legislation with the opposite effect of your intention.
 
2019-01-10 3:52:52 PM  
Oh, yay, another fark gun thread... cue the Russian mafia...(NRA members)
 
2019-01-10 3:52:56 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: Imagine a scenario where the gun humpers' favorite president declares a national emergency over immigration as it seems he will thereby giving precedent for President Kamala Harris to do the same about guns.


If Trump went door to door confiscating guns in "Chicago" wink wink they'd be thrilled
 
2019-01-10 3:52:58 PM  

Luse: FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.

Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.


**wanking motion**
 
2019-01-10 3:53:47 PM  

Gubbo: thehobbes: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

No positive comments. Check
Negative link vote score. Check
Greened regardless.... check

The liters should get a taste of the good parts of TF


What are these "good parts" of which you speak?
 
2019-01-10 3:54:09 PM  

HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**


It is funny.  Until you get convicted of a felony because words have actual precise legal meanings.
 
2019-01-10 3:54:09 PM  

HedlessChickn: Luse: FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.

Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.

**wanking motion**


**wanking motion**
 
2019-01-10 3:54:15 PM  
I support any politician from either party who will vote for this and will not vote for any politician from either party that opposes it.
 
2019-01-10 3:55:05 PM  
A background check would be mandatory for future sale or gifting of grandfathered guns, even between two private parties.

Oh, the horror!
 
2019-01-10 3:55:29 PM  

FortyHams: Luse: FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.

Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.

Cosmetic features that let you go pew-pew at little kids easier.


What an inherently ignorant thing to say. Tell me how telescopic stocks make you pew pew kids better oh wise one.
 
2019-01-10 3:55:33 PM  
A ban on new weapon sales is pointless by itself. We need to get the existing guns off the street. Buybacks would be a great stimulus programme.
 
2019-01-10 3:55:41 PM  

vrax: A background check would be mandatory for future sale or gifting of grandfathered guns, even between two private parties.

Oh, the horror!


That's actually not a bad idea.
 
2019-01-10 3:55:55 PM  
Would it be asking too much to just regulate parts of them under the NFA like we do silencers?

Just make semi-autos AOWs. People who can get through the process can still get 'em, while Joe Schmoe switches his preferences towards bolt-actions, single-actions, lever-actions, pump actions, and single-shots.
 
2019-01-10 3:56:14 PM  
Women, amirite? Your blog sucks.
 
2019-01-10 3:56:23 PM  

KangTheMad: HedlessChickn: Luse: FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.

Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.

**wanking motion**

**wanking motion**

**

wanking motion**
 
2019-01-10 3:56:26 PM  
This will clearly become law, and not at all get more people to vote for Trump.
 
2019-01-10 3:56:35 PM  

KangTheMad: But yeesh. Talk about a biased article.


You expect objectivity from "bearingarms.com"?
 
2019-01-10 3:56:56 PM  

HedlessChickn: Luse: FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.

Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.

**wanking motion**


I heard you the first time. Now put on your helmet and go play by yourself in the corner, and don't eat the paint chips this time around.
 
2019-01-10 3:57:23 PM  

Luse: FortyHams: Luse: FortyHams: Luse: HedlessChickn: See, it's funny cos Dems don't understand the specific terminology used by gun nuts.

IT'S SO FUNNY I THINK I MIGHT DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE

**wanking motion**

I see, so you don't think understanding the thing you're supposed to be regulating is necessary for good lawmaking? Where do you stand on politicians farking up the internet because they think it's a series of tubes?

Mmm, jes, there shouldn't be laws against child porn on the internet unless lawmakers can properly install a router.

Nobody is asking them to manufacture a firearm. However a basic understanding of features is highly helpful. If they were talking about rates of fire or anything that made the weapon inherently more dangerous then sure, but they're talking about cosmetic features in many cases. Legislating that is as stupid as legislating the color of your purse.

Cosmetic features that let you go pew-pew at little kids easier.

What an inherently ignorant thing to say. Tell me how telescopic stocks make you pew pew kids better oh wise one.


Dude, your fetish kills children. I wonder if you'll ever accept that fact before it happens to you or someone close to you.
 
2019-01-10 3:57:28 PM  
I know she's seen horrible stuff in her 105 years in government service. But focus on the Orange disaster. Not this issue. "Assault weapons" (semi auto rifles) kill maybe 200 people a year in the USA. I'm pretty sure tripping on curbs kills more people a year.
 
2019-01-10 3:57:38 PM  

Shaggy_C: A ban on new weapon sales is pointless by itself. We need to get the existing guns off the street. Buybacks would be a great stimulus programme.


Along with ceasing to be so willing to give the choice to plead down to a lesser charge if you're facing a charge that would prohibit you from owning a gun.
 
2019-01-10 3:58:29 PM  
So cosmetic features are going to be banned again.

Feinstein and guns is like Trump and the wall.
 
2019-01-10 3:59:00 PM  

KangTheMad: Thundrull: Subby's one of the fire arms fetishists that just can't stand when anyone else isn't a Ph.D level gunsmith. There's one...or ten, in every 2nd Amendment discussion thread. F*cking loosers.

idk. I mean, on one hand it's not that hard to look something up for an hour so it sounds like you know what you're talking about.


Well I do know. There is no good reason for mentally ill teenagers to be running around with semi-automatic long guns and high capacity clips designed to kill dozens of people in a few minutes. The notion that anyone would argue about whether it's an "assault weapon" or sporting rifle is just ludicrous. It's a form of chickenshiat pedantry...and weak.
 
Displayed 50 of 407 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  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.