Guns

[a6m5]

Insurance/God's forgiveness are similar analogies. However with the latter, the responsibilities of the meantime morality can sometimes be lost if the focus is on the umbrella protection. So while they're similar, they may have crucial differences.

I understand where you are coming from, but I think that's blowing it out of proportion. Much like (understandably)the way media hype incidents involving shooting. When you mention morality, that can apply to almost anything. Hate to bring it up again, but if one's concerned about safety or morality, this discussion should be about banning the real monster in our societies like alcohol(just making a point).

Also consider the person that has insurance, but leaves their house wide open because they have it.

I think that's precisely what @FoolKiller is concerned about.

 

[LeMansAid]

@a6m5 In all of that I'm probing what people do when they feel they're protected. Yes, getting on with enjoying life might be a really good one. Adopting complacency might be another. @FoolKiller as far as I can see is an example of the absolute antithesis of complacency, but with "house wide open" I'm referring to someone not putting any energy in to "keeping the bastards honest" as was the Australian Democrats' mantra. They were quite different to your Democrat party btw.

Some of the people I butt heads with in here are also people I would eagerly vote for, were they to appear on my ballot. My concern is that they're not at all representative of the "common man", and I fear what happens when the broader population rest too out of touch.

 

[BobK]

Perhaps this needs mentioning here:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

I for one take the document from which this was extracted very seriously. So did the framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and particularly the second amendment.

The fact that this was written late in the eighteenth century and we just began the twenty first does not change its validity one whit.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You can't make this stuff up.

Conservatives want to arm teachers to shoot and kill school shooters. The school board's big plan? Throw textbooks and cans of food at them. I kid you not

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/13/living/feat-students-canned-goods-stop-school-shooters/index.html

 

[GBO Possum]

Jim Jefferies provides some fun and sensibility

LANGUAGE WARNING!

 

[DK]

^ I think a language warning wouldn't go amiss here.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Jim Jefferies provides some fun and sensibility

LANGUAGE WARNING!

I don't find it that funny tbh. Anyone that takes the stance that you have to somehow prove or justify or have a reason for owning a gun doesn't understand the issue, even if it's comedy. No one asks you to prove why you need a car, or fence around your yard or 4 tvs instead of 2. Guns aren't any different IMO.

 

[GBO Possum]

I don't find it that funny tbh. Anyone that takes the stance that you have to somehow prove or justify or have a reason for owning a gun doesn't understand the issue, even if it's comedy. No one asks you to prove why you need a car, or fence around your yard or 4 tvs instead of 2. Guns aren't any different IMO.

He's making exactly that point.

He also says don't make up BS stories about defending your home or armed militias!

 

[FoolKiller]

He's making exactly that point.

He also says don't make up BS stories about defending your home or armed militias!

They're only BS to him because he doesn't see the necessity, which is funny when coming from a guy who loves to tell the story about how he had a home invasion by a guy threatening him with a machete while he basically curled up on the floor. To be honest, a guy who has to bury his anti-gun rants in the middle of a Netflix comedy special to get people to listen might not have the best points.

I like Jim Jeffries' style of comedy, and even think he is funny when he talks about gun control, but its easy to do when your point is the only one being presented. He's a good guy, had a great show that FX killed by switching it to a higher tier channel, and does a lot of wonderful things for the disabled community.

That doesn't make his gun control points more valid than others, or that shirt any less horrendous.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I found it quite funny, but also found that he cut corners and didn't make a true valid argument (safe with guns in it, is the only one I feel) or arguments about other things. Just like I don't agree with Lewis Black or Colbert or whoever I find funny as hell, they cut these corners to make the jokes more outrageous and hilarious, all one must do is a little fact checking to show where they're one sided and not fully honest. But why put a satire piece in here as if it's a true rebuke to the idea of gun ownership, all you've done is nearly ruined the funny aspect of it by having someone take it for something other than what it was meant to be...a joke.

 

[FoolKiller]

But why put a satire piece in here as if it's a true rebuke to the idea of gun ownership, all you've done is nearly ruined the funny aspect of it by having someone take it for something other than what it was meant to be...a joke.

Jim Jeffries makes it obvious in interviews that he takes a 20-minute sidetrack into a gun control rant. He added it to his routine on purpose because he felt he could make it funny. The comedy special is called Bare, as in bare arms, for that reason. He's very serious about everything he says and repeats it in a non-show setting.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Jim Jeffries makes it obvious in interviews that he takes a 20-minute sidetrack into a gun control rant. He added it to his routine on purpose because he felt he could make it funny. The comedy special is called Bare, as in bare arms, for that reason. He's very serious about everything he says and repeats it in a non-show setting.

Exactly why it's not funny to me. It's not hard to tell from the nature of the humour that there is an agenda behind it and that's what makes it not funny to me. Nothing wrong with social commentary in comedy, that's the norm, but when you take it to the level of hysterical advocacy which is what I see here, it's not funny to me any more.

Caveat: I don't own any guns nor do I have any intentions of buying one...unless I take up hunting in retirement.

 

[Carlos]

Don't think I need to make a thread about this, but this just happened at a Dutch news show. He demanded air time. He said he was sent by a sort off intelligence agency and wanted to tell the people the truth about our gov.

Skip to 3:50 for the arrest. He's a bit cool about it saying 'ah the police is here already'.

 

[Dennisch]

Gangster with his silenced pistol.

 

[Carlos]

Gangster with his silenced pistol.

Didn't you thought of Hitman?

 

[Johnnypenso]

So what did he say for the first 4 minutes?

 

[Dennisch]

So what did he say for the first 4 minutes?

They (security guard and the gunman) talk about that the security guard is not gonna get in his way, and he will make sure he can do his story on tv. And the gunman states that nothing bad is going to happen.

Then he goes on that he has big news, and that they (his "group of hackers") will show us that the current society isn't what it seems to be.

It's mostly ramblings of someone who's a bit lost in his brain.

Edit.

Woohoo. CNN just reported about it for a whole 10 seconds. World news baby!

 

[Carlos]

Damn ninja Dennis! Was typing for minutes already But I had nothing to add more than you.

 

[Johnnypenso]

They (security guard and the gunman) talk about that the security guard is not gonna get in his way, and he will make sure he can do his story on tv. And the gunman states that nothing bad is going to happen.

Then he goes on that he has big news, and that they (his "group of hackers") will show us that the current society isn't what it seems to be.

It's mostly ramblings of someone who's a bit lost in his brain.

Edit.

Woohoo. CNN just reported about it for a whole 10 seconds. World news baby!

I have to go check Fox and Breitbart to find out if he's a Muslim extremist. It'll be the first headline if he is

EDIT: Nope, just a dirty hacker so he's only second tier on Fox and nowhere to be found on Breitbart. I did find out that Gwyneth Paltrow steam cleans her coochie though, which I find oddly exciting

 

[Dennisch]

I have to go check Fox and Breitbart to find out if he's a Muslim extremist. It'll be the first headline if he is

His name is Tarik Zahzah. I think they have their news story.

Also, not really all that shocking but the gun was a fake gun.

He also had a note with him.

I will translate it.

When you read this, don't panic. Don't scream and don't inform your colleagues. Pretend that everything is fine. I am heavily armed. If you cooperate, no harm will be done. Remember that I am not alone.

There are another 5, plus 98 hackers who are ready for a cyber attack. Besides, there are in this country, 8 bombs planted which contain radioactive material. If you don't bring me to studio 8 to take over a broadcast, we are forced to take action. You don't be the one who caused it, do you? Take me to studio 8, the NOS studio.

First part I have translated. The second part is what the hostage should have read on tv. Basically the same stuff.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Jim Jeffries makes it obvious in interviews that he takes a 20-minute sidetrack into a gun control rant. He added it to his routine on purpose because he felt he could make it funny. The comedy special is called Bare, as in bare arms, for that reason. He's very serious about everything he says and repeats it in a non-show setting.

Exactly why it's not funny to me. It's not hard to tell from the nature of the humour that there is an agenda behind it and that's what makes it not funny to me. Nothing wrong with social commentary in comedy, that's the norm, but when you take it to the level of hysterical advocacy which is what I see here, it's not funny to me any more.

Caveat: I don't own any guns nor do I have any intentions of buying one...unless I take up hunting in retirement.

Thanks I better understand where you're coming from and also know something about the guy I didn't prior.

 

[a6m5]

To be honest, a guy who has to bury his anti-gun rants in the middle of a Netflix comedy special to get people to listen might not have the best points.

I remember this dude. I thought I hit the jackpot when I saw his special on Netflix. He casually started on gun control, then turned into some pathetic youtube rant guy.

Comedian can make fun of race, faith, politics, whatever! JUST MAKE IT FUNNY. Very few specials are absolutely great from start to finish, but this guy going huff 'n' puff all over the stage, taking epic nosedive over ONE, single political issue was very disappointing. It started out really good, but he's way too serious.

 

[TVR27]

“I know what you're thinking. Did he fire six shots or only five? Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I've kinda lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?”

― Clint Eastwood

 

[FoolKiller]

Woohoo. CNN just reported about it for a whole 10 seconds. World news baby!

Much like I don't advertise how easy getting around security at my office would be, they don't want to give any nutjob ideas about what could happen at their studios. the US 24-hour news networks probably have enough haters and threats as is, without showing how they could bust in and get their revenge televised.


Why didn't the station turn off the cameras/feed? They do not need a video of their staff being killed, if it got to that point.

 

[Carlos]

Much like I don't advertise how easy getting around security at my office would be, they don't want to give any nutjob ideas about what could happen at their studios. the US 24-hour news networks probably have enough haters and threats as is, without showing how they could bust in and get their revenge televised.


Why didn't the station turn off the cameras/feed? They do not need a video of their staff being killed, if it got to that point.

It wasn't live and he was with a security guard. The guard led him to a different room. (A different room than where the live thing was happening) While he was there the building was evacuated. I assume the cameras were on because the man asked for it. He also said he had no problem with being arrested after he had his little talk show.

 

[FoolKiller]

It wasn't live and he was with a security guard. The guard led him to a different room. (A different room than where the live thing was happening) While he was there the building was evacuated. I assume the cameras were on because the man asked for it. He also said he had no problem with being arrested after he had his little talk show.

Ah. OK. That was not made clear just by watching the video.

 

[Dennisch]

Ah. OK. That was not made clear just by watching the video.

At 4.31:

If you make any suspicious moves we will open fire. Do you UNDERSTAND!!!!????!!??

Delicious. Just delicious.

 

[Brett]

Why didn't the station turn off the cameras/feed? They do not need a video of their staff being killed, if it got to that point.

And pass up the opportunity at an easy news story?! /s

Though that would have been a golden story in the movie Nightcrawler.

 

[squadops]

I was surprised to see this coming from the mouth of Interpol, I guess I'm jaded into thinking anything global has to be impractical liberal hokus pokus Anyway, from an article posted in January...

Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble said today the U.S. and the rest of the democratic world is at a security crossroads in the wake of last month’s deadly al-Shabab attack at a shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya – and suggested an answer could be in arming civilians.

http://10news.dk/interpol-allowing-...most-effective-way-to-prevent-terror-attacks/

 

[Exorcet]

From:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/the-war-on-police-in-america.321394/

If you own a gun, and have small children who could get a hold of it, they are not likely going to "save their lives" with it. THAT is ridiculous lol.

I will try to look for the cases I know of this happening later and post them.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/kendra-st-clair-oklahoma-girl-12-shoots-intruder/story?id=17524438

There was a similar case that I thought was in MI, but I can't seem to find it now. There are a few more you can find by searching for "child shoots robber", or something along those lines. Children taught how to use a gun are perfectly able to use them safely. It can honestly be more dangerous to keep them ignorant.




Adding in one last post from the original thread

The US gun laws are stupid

In your opinion.

Your life isn't as important to the policy makers as your vote.

And you get decide that reducing my chance of being shot is worth taking away my ability to acquire a gun? No thanks, I decide for myself what in my life is worth what.

The quote is your own interpretation. From my point of view, the ones in government protecting gun rights are doing the right thing.

A good example of how stupid your gun laws are is slide stocks. Why is something that essentially makes semi-auto rifles fully auto considered legal, when fully auto rifles aren't? At what point does anyone even need a semi-auto weapon? let alone one with a slide stock, making it possible to emulate fully auto fire.

Asking if someone needs something is not a valid question. People can do what they like so long as they aren't getting in anyone else's way. There is no other way to cut it fairly. You most likely have your own property. You can do with it as you want. If you don't want guns there, ban them there. To do anymore than that is to try to control other people.

Hunting is perhaps the best use of a firearm. I can't imagine when I would have ever needed a semi auto when hunting. I'm not trying to spray a crowd of roos or deer lol.

It's just one use of many. Hunting, self defense, entertainment; they are all equally valid reasons to own a gun.