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.

(The Daily Caller)   George Will: Tougher gun laws, assault weapons ban won't help. But shhh, he uses real world info, data and ignores media hyperbole. So warning; you might learn something   ( dailycaller.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, George Will, assault weapons ban, gun laws, assault weapons, hyperbole, .info  
•       •       •

6341 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Dec 2012 at 3:35 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-12-16 02:44:42 PM  
6 votes:
This is the guy who said Romney would win 325 electoral votes.
2012-12-16 02:46:16 PM  
3 votes:
"George Will" and "learn something" are mutually exclusive.
2012-12-16 06:01:09 PM  
2 votes:

Dimensio: Paul Baumer: Fark It: Still waiting for an example of compromise from the gun control side...

Gave you one upthread. Magazine limitations, recurring licensing, mandatory recurring health checks, mandatory home safety measures, mandatory re-qualification and ongoing training, all licensed firearms must be produced for inspection on a recurring basis. Close gun show loophole.

What would firearm owners receive in return?

ffindo.files.wordpress.comView Full Size
2012-12-16 04:09:10 PM  
2 votes:
I shut a window for a few minutes yesterday but it's still cold in here.
I guess nothing can be done.
2012-12-16 03:56:37 PM  
2 votes:
Thanks George. The NRA and gun nuts everywhere appreciate your fellatio. Don''t forget to smile after you swallow.
2012-12-16 03:56:20 PM  
2 votes:
Tucker Carlson publishing George Will? Is there a sale on bow ties?
2012-12-16 03:55:02 PM  
2 votes:
Remember, any hypothetical gun control legislation must completely eliminate all gun violence to be valid. If it does not, then there's no point in even having any gun control, and we'll just have to live with 30,000 dead and several shooting sprees every year. Even if gun control could significantly reduce that death toll, the fact that there will still be some gun violence means means that it's not worth pursuing.

Since there will always be some criminals who break laws, that means that laws are completely useless, and therefore, we shouldn't even bother having any laws at all.
2012-12-16 03:52:35 PM  
2 votes:
If guns don't kill people load one and put it in your mouth and pull the trigger because guns won't kill you.

/gun owner
//support assault weapons ban
///will not stop everything
////we need to stop the guns don't kill people arguement

It seems when someone with guns and lives in a rural area like I did before moving to Tulsa, people don't know how to deal with it that i don't toe the guns don't kill people line.

I've been called so many names these last few days, because people can't process someone who is familiar with guns being honest about my familiarity with guns.
2012-12-16 03:49:20 PM  
2 votes:

CarnySaur: I'm surprised he didn't use a baseball analogy.

George Will and baseball? Also hilarious.

Home runs increase dramatically.

Lots of people say it's due to a 'lively' ball.

George says all those fools are falling prey to the tendancy of Americans to credit sudden changes to technological causes.

George's explanation? Aluminum bats. I couldn't make up derp like that.
2012-12-17 10:06:54 AM  
1 vote:

please: The record for a school killing was in 1927, at 45 kids. And it wasn't a mass shooting.

You think removing the mechanism will stop the psychopaths - the psychopaths will just choose another mechanism.

Ok I'll stand in a room with a "psychopath" of your choosing, and he'll have a "tool" in his hand like a hammer or screwdriver. You'll stand in a room with the same psychopath and he'll have a semi-automatic rifle in his hand.

Whoever survives owes the other guy a coke. Deal?
2012-12-17 09:20:08 AM  
1 vote:
I voted for Obama, but I'll never ever vote Democrat again if new gun laws come down. I can't believe they haven't learned.
Shame on people here and shame on the media for exploiting this tragedy for your pet causes and ratings.
2012-12-17 09:07:45 AM  
1 vote:
I, for one, won't make up my mind on gun control until I hear what Peggy Noonan's gut has to say about it all.
2012-12-17 02:59:46 AM  
1 vote:

mab1823: 1. Assault weapons ban. I really don't care what excuses people have. There is zero reason for the average American to own weapons that can be converted to fully automatic or have massive magazines/clips.

*** President Perry and the Republican House/Senate will repeal it.

2. High-volume magazine ban. I realize that it's horribly inconvenient for some people to have to reload occasionally while they're target shooting...but it's entirely possible that not having these magazines around would lessen the chance that some insane idiot could spray a crowd with gunfire.

*** President Perry and the Republican House/Senate will repeal it.

3. Highly regulated and taxed ammo sales. Make purchasing ammo be much more expensive than it is now (with an exception for ammo sold and used at target ranges) to discourage the accumulation of mass-murder levels of bullets. Make ammo available in fewer places, and especially not via the internet.

*** President Perry and the Republican House/Senate will repeal it.

4. Require a rigorous yearly psychiatric evaluation as a condition of gun ownership. Deny gun licenses to individuals (and families) with history of certain mental disorders. Severe manic depressive? Sorry, you don't get a gun. You can't yell FIRE in a theater, either. It's about public safety.

*** President Perry and the Republican House/Senate will repeal it.

5. License one handgun per person at a time, with only very rare exceptions. Discourage the building of home arsenals. You want a gun for protection? Fine. You can generally only shoot one at a time anyway.

*** President Perry and the Republican House/Senate will repeal it.

6. Eliminate any and all gun show loopholes. I mean, come on.

*** President Perry and the Republican House/Senate will repeal it.

7. Require the purchase of gun insurance for every gun purchase. The premium can be based on risk factors and funds the payout of damages to anyone injured or killed by that particular firearm.

*** President Perry and the Republican House/Senate will repeal it.
2012-12-16 11:53:16 PM  
1 vote:

orclover: Tranquilizing everybody would be the safest and kindest mercy you could show for the entire country. A mentally healthy and lulled populace would be the single most peaceful entity this world has ever seen. Violence, rape, suicide, all would be almost completely gone. Depression? Gone. It would be a farking utopia and it should be done to us at gun point, hell, at nuke point if need be.

At least until half of them turned into Reavers.
2012-12-16 10:35:13 PM  
1 vote:

Do you....do you two work for the government together to do this to gun debate threads?
2012-12-16 10:12:16 PM  
1 vote:
You gun advocates are getting tiresome. You "no one single thing will work 100% so do nothing" argument is particularly tiresome. Vaccines aren't 100% effective, but we still use them. Airbags and seatbelts don't prevent all deaths in accidents, but we still use them because they're highly effective. It's called harm reduction and reasonable, civilized people are in favor of it.

Since you're all such perfect gun owners, well-versed in every type of firearm and expert marksmen, what is your big objection to setting a high bar for firearm (and ammunition) purchase? The purpose of a gun is to kill; is it really so unreasonable to ask that there are restrictions on purchasing one? Before you can get a driver's license, you have to prove that you know traffic laws and can operate a motor vehicle. If you develop an illness that prohibits you from being a safe driver, the doctor contacts the DMV and your license is suspended. Why shouldn't there be requirements for guns? Or do you object to driver's licenses and vehicle registration because the government is keeping a list and knows where you live and what kind of car you drive so they could come and take away your car?

I would think that your fear of a gun ban would make you in favor of doing everything possible to keep guns out of irresponsible hands. That's why people object to guns. It's not because you use them for hunting or protecting livestock; it's because criminal use them to kill human beings. The more we can do to reduce the killing, the less call for a gun ban.

I don't want a gun but I don't think they should be banned either. People like to hunt, ranchers and farmers need them to protect livestock, people have jobs that take them into unsafe areas, etc. There are legitimate uses for guns. Why do you object so strongly to measures designed to restrict them to legitimate owners and keep them away from people who want to use them to kill human beings? Are you also opposed to building and electrical codes that make buildings safer, safety equipment on cars, certain medications being available only by prescription?
2012-12-16 07:37:40 PM  
1 vote:
Lets see. Pass gun grabbing and banning measures that do nothing but make half the country feel better. Or enact civil rights restricting laws that test and treat the populace for its epidemic mental health problems that are causing mass homicides?
1-media-cdn.foolz.usView Full Size

That way everybody is pissed off! Lets do both. If nobody is happy then we must have done something right.
2012-12-16 07:26:19 PM  
1 vote:
But most of all, this Man has the answer to all our Problems.


2012-12-16 06:34:36 PM  
1 vote:

Friction8r: Liberals have murdered far more children with their ridiculous abortions than guns ever have. Keep your sickening abortion laws, and we'll keep our guns. See you on Judgment Day.

Never bring a fetus to a gun fight.
2012-12-16 05:43:43 PM  
1 vote:

Pokey.Clyde: steal

Whew! So glad all those guns she had prevented her from being killed! It's obvious everyone needs to carry a gun including teachers!
2012-12-16 05:18:32 PM  
1 vote:

Fark It: I'll ask again, since no one has really given me an answer.

Gun control advocates consistently argue for compromise when they ask for discussion. For those of you who are asking for discussion and compromise, who aren't calling for pie-in-the-sky schemes and painting all gun owners with the same NRA tea party conservative brush, I ask this:

What are gun control advocates willing to put on the table when it comes to this compromise we hear all the time?

Not banning all civilian ownership of firearms outright. Sometimes "compromise" simply means we don't come down on you like a f*cking ten-ton hammer.

Gun-control advocates like to use the term "compromise" because most of the NRA tea party conservatives that dominate the national discourse on the topic piss themselves in mindless fear whenever they hear the phrase "gun control." If they weren't such a bunch of mewling cowards incapable of understanding that there's actually a middle ground between "no one gets guns" and "everyone gets any kind of gun they want" we might actually be able to toss out the compromise word and call it what it really is: rational discussion of limiting general public access to tools designed solely for killing. 

/Yes, yes, "2n amendment", "founding fathers", "protecting us from tyranny", etc. If you think we're still free of tyranny after 230+ years as a country because people have easier access to guns than they do prescription medication, then you're a f*cking retard.
//That's the general "you", by the way, not you specifically, Fark It.
2012-12-16 05:06:35 PM  
1 vote:
So which one of you is this?

blogs.laweekly.comView Full Size
2012-12-16 04:56:04 PM  
1 vote:
i.imgur.comView Full Size
2012-12-16 04:48:49 PM  
1 vote:
Ok, that's settled. Don't change anything and hope the weekly mass shootings magically stop
2012-12-16 04:23:14 PM  
1 vote:

Outrageous Muff: poor mental health treatment

cdn.ticketfly.comView Full Size

Thank you Ronald Reagan, your legacy is intact!"
2012-12-16 04:20:36 PM  
1 vote:
Mandatory suicide vests for everyone, with dead-man detonators. Someone dies suddenly, everything in a 50-ffoot radius gets taken out with 'em. No mass shootings for fear of a chain reaction that'll wipe out half the town.

People would also drive more carefully when pedestrians might be in the area, perhaps be more willing to pay for universal healthcare (wouldn't want to be near a guy who dies of a heart attack!) and crime in general should decrease. Also saves on funeral costs...

M.A.D. got us through the Cold War, and it'll serve keep society civil.
2012-12-16 04:19:48 PM  
1 vote:

Pokey.Clyde: Empty Matchbook: A law that made mental health facilities more affordable/accessible than an assault rifle?

He DID NOT HAVE AN ASSAULT RIFLE. The Bushmaster rifle he had is not an assault rifle.

You know what? Fark it, I'm out. This thread is too full of stupid. People who don't know what they are talking about, trying to pass off their uninformed opinions as fact.

When you leave all that will leave with you.
2012-12-16 04:17:51 PM  
1 vote:

Outrageous Muff: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: How many dead?

So you're saying it's not as big of deal if(or not enough) people didn't die?

2012-12-16 04:11:21 PM  
1 vote:

rohar: PartTimeBuddha: cameroncrazy1984: Tell that to the UK, a country that hasn't had a mass shooting since Dunblane, after which they enacted the 1997 Firearms act.

Exactly. The laws were tightened.

And it did annoy a lot of gun enthusiasts.

Total handgun offenses in the UK in 1909 was 1983 incidents. In 2010 it was 3105. Yup, that turned the tide right there.

1909? I see you learned debate from the Mitt Romney School of Horses and Bayonets.
2012-12-16 03:57:26 PM  
1 vote:

cameroncrazy1984: Tell that to the UK, a country that hasn't had a mass shooting since Dunblane, after which they enacted the 1997 Firearms act.

Exactly. The laws were tightened.

And it did annoy a lot of gun enthusiasts.
2012-12-16 03:56:23 PM  
1 vote:
Isn't this the guy who thought Romney would win with 300+ EVs?

Because if so I'm not listening to a damn word he says. In fact, I'm going to do the OPPOSITE of what he says.
2012-12-16 03:50:42 PM  
1 vote:
People are still listening to George Will?

It must be flat-out wonderful being a Republlican. You can spend your entire career being wrong about everything, and people still think what you have to say is worth listening to.
2012-12-16 03:45:34 PM  
1 vote:

Pokey.Clyde: ghare: 20 dead 6-and-7-year-olds say George Will is full of shiat.

And I say you are full of shiat. Just what kind of laws would have stopped that dumbass from killing his mother and stealing guns from her?

Yes, sweetie, everyone having lots of guns is good. We can't do aaaannnnyyyything about it.

I'm convainced, the Tree of Liberty needed those 20 children sacrificed so you can feel like a big man and protect yourself against King George III.
2012-12-16 03:45:28 PM  
1 vote:

dickfreckle: Believe it or not, George Will is still among the saner of the right's pundits, despite him often publishing turds.

Seriously, folks - when guys like George Will and Pat Buchanan are your intellectual titans, maybe it's time for a little reflection on exactly where everything went horribly wrong. Probably that moment you all decided that pandering to retards was your best shot at success.

The difference between George Will and other right-wing pundits is that George Will's pieces are like long, thick, coiling turds. They come out exactly the way they're supposed to. His fellow pundits shoot out diarrhea and greenish-blue pebbles and the readers eat that up.
2012-12-16 03:40:11 PM  
1 vote:

Kimothy: Except that the examples he gives are actually examples of laws that work, making these kinds of mass shootings the exception not the rule. Shootings like this are incredibly RARE in those countries. In the USA, they are commonplace and occur several times a year.

Gosh, I guess it's crazy to suggest that mass shootings in countries with strict gun laws are rare for a reason.
2012-12-16 03:19:43 PM  
1 vote:
George Will also hates blue jeans.
2012-12-16 02:56:16 PM  
1 vote:
Check the source - Daily Caller? Was World Nut Daily busy with the really important news?
2012-12-16 02:55:24 PM  
1 vote:
Believe it or not, George Will is still among the saner of the right's pundits, despite him often publishing turds.

Seriously, folks - when guys like George Will and Pat Buchanan are your intellectual titans, maybe it's time for a little reflection on exactly where everything went horribly wrong. Probably that moment you all decided that pandering to retards was your best shot at success.
2012-12-16 02:47:19 PM  
1 vote:
There's no "real world info" or "data" in there at all. He just says "didn't help," and shuts down the topic.
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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.