Zaelath wrote:Hell, I don't even buy the argument that you're defending your life in most cases, you're defending your property. Unless someone is out to murder you there's little reason to expect that a criminal wants to kill you, and IF the target is murder, your concealed weapon is useless unless they want to talk about it first like some bad movie villain.
Stragi wrote:I don't think that's a realistic situation and If I had a CCW I would most likely not even pull it out if I was being mugged unless it was an absolute life or death no alternatives situation.
Meaning what? That if they shot you once you'd then draw your weapon?
If they have a gun pointed at you to rob you, that's not life and death, or do you expect them to announce their intent to shoot in some deranged soliloquy?
Meaning if you are being robbed its better to give them what they want even ifyou are carrying. But since you are changing the situation now and saying they are shooting me then it's justified to brandish a weapon because I am now at risk of dying or sustaining serious bodily injury.
*~*stragi*~* wrote:people should have the right to defend their lives removed from them completely?
Where's that from? /boggle
Yes, if you're going to have eveyone armed, make it obvious they're armed. Why does it need to be a secret? How is a hidden pistol more able to protect you than a visible one?
Hell, I don't even buy the argument that you're defending your life in most cases, you're defending your property. Unless someone is out to murder you there's little reason to expect that a criminal wants to kill you, and IF the target is murder, your concealed weapon is useless unless they want to talk about it first like some bad movie villain.
It's what you're saying, man. You don't like handguns and your alternatives are not realistic. Open carrying is such a bad idea-it does nothing but make you a target for people looking for a free gun, or for cops to harass you if they happen to be ignorant of your local laws, or other random retards who just see a gun and panic. It opens you up to a whole new world of shit. Carrying around rifles and shotguns is just not going to be realistic, not to mention a rifle would be far more dangerous to innocents than a handgun if you had to use it due to the power behind the rounds.
We should just replace all guns with katanas and bullets with anime that would be sweet i'd want sailor moon
The handgun is not the only form of self-defence available, if you want to pretend it is, and that therefore I'm suggesting anyone who is attacked should roll into the feotal position and await the inevitable, that's your issue.
I don't give a shit if the cops harrass people for open carry, it's either legal or it's not. CCW makes me a lot more nervous than someone carrying a gun in a proper holster, are you going to use the same bullshit logic to say you shouldn't CCW that you use for open carry?
It's not bullshit logic, it's reality. I don't know what world your living in where people are going to walk around with ar-15's or everyone is Steven Segal or Jim Bowie or some shit.
Are you just paranoid about everyone you meet in your daily life? Everyone you pass on the street? Chances are some of them are probably concealed carrying and you don't even know, which is the entire point.
*~*stragi*~* wrote:
Are you just paranoid about everyone you meet in your daily life? Everyone you pass on the street? Chances are some of them are probably concealed carrying and you don't even know, which is the entire point.
The point, dear reader, is that people like Funkmasterr pass the criteria for CCW. I rest my fucking case.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
We don't know that. You do (at least here in Ohio) have to be able to pass a background check and be able to pass a shooting competency test. That requires you to put 80% of your shots into a 9" plate at the defense standard of 21 feet. You don't just print a CCW off a website and go packing. It also requires a 12 hour course on the relevant laws and other training information.
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:We don't know that. You do (at least here in Ohio) have to be able to pass a background check and be able to pass a shooting competency test. That requires you to put 80% of your shots into a 9" plate at the defense standard of 21 feet. You don't just print a CCW off a website and go packing. It also requires a 12 hour course on the relevant laws and other training information.
We'll his posting history indicates he carries, agreed that doesn't prove he's got a CCW.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
I am not sure what Funk has done on here that shows he is a felon, drug user, rapist, burglar, or violent offender. For you to judge his competency to defend himself due to your being his polar opposite and base it purely from his posting on a message board is not only ludicrous, but also shows you are a judgemental tool. I seriously doubt that 95% of the people spouting nonsensical retardation on this board would even say half of what they do to another person standing in front of them, much less verbally attack like happens so frequently here.
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:We don't know that. You do (at least here in Ohio) have to be able to pass a background check and be able to pass a shooting competency test. That requires you to put 80% of your shots into a 9" plate at the defense standard of 21 feet. You don't just print a CCW off a website and go packing. It also requires a 12 hour course on the relevant laws and other training information.
We'll his posting history indicates he carries, agreed that doesn't prove he's got a CCW.
I've never seen that but I'd sure hope he's way less retarded in person if he does.
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:I am not sure what Funk has done on here that shows he is a felon, drug user, rapist, burglar, or violent offender. For you to judge his competency to defend himself due to your being his polar opposite and base it purely from his posting on a message board is not only ludicrous, but also shows you are a judgemental tool. I seriously doubt that 95% of the people spouting nonsensical retardation on this board would even say half of what they do to another person standing in front of them, much less verbally attack like happens so frequently here.
There's no "judgement" in there, fucktard, it's quoting back what the man himself said.
He'd start a fight over an accident w/ a shopping cart, he'd spit in someone's face to incite a fight, and he has a CCW.
Go ahead and defend that and try to pretend it's MY character flaws that are the problem with just about any retard being allowed a gun provided they haven't been caught before.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
We'll his posting history indicates he carries, agreed that doesn't prove he's got a CCW.
What ass are you pulling this out of?
See above. Feel free to kiss that ass now.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:I am not sure what Funk has done on here that shows he is a felon, drug user, rapist, burglar, or violent offender. For you to judge his competency to defend himself due to your being his polar opposite and base it purely from his posting on a message board is not only ludicrous, but also shows you are a judgemental tool. I seriously doubt that 95% of the people spouting nonsensical retardation on this board would even say half of what they do to another person standing in front of them, much less verbally attack like happens so frequently here.
There's no "judgement" in there, fucktard, it's quoting back what the man himself said.
He'd start a fight over an accident w/ a shopping cart, he'd spit in someone's face to incite a fight, and he has a CCW.
Go ahead and defend that and try to pretend it's MY character flaws that are the problem with just about any retard being allowed a gun provided they haven't been caught before.
Why are you getting so unhinged? Also I don't think you read his post.
Fagmaster wrote:Now I am positive you are a total retard. First things first, I have my conceal carry permit, and if I thought for a second that he was intent on shooting me , I can assure you I would do everything in my power to pull first. I also keep several knives in my car at all times, generally one on me, even in clubs, because of people like you. If this guy or anyone else in this situation really thought they were in the right after what they did and wanted to come at me, I would gladly ruin their life by any means necessary, even if it landed me in jail in the process.
I bolded the part where he would be justified
I italicized the rest where it's fucking creepy and if he ever pulled that shit out he'd be jailed so fast it's not even funny. I'd much rather he not even have a weapon let alone cc/oc. I still don't think he's truely that huge of a fag in person though, and if he is the law would take care of him pretty quick if he did stupid shit with his weapon.
There's more than one post in that thread, keep reading.
If he's not a classic example of a fucktard that would escalate to violence a situation that clearly doesn't call for it, then I don't know who is. His intent is clear, scratch car => spit => punch thrown => pull gun, which apparently he wouldn't use unless they pulled theirs.
Feel free to think that's the kind of person we should be handing out CCWs to, I'll feel free to think you're mildy retarded.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
Zaelath wrote:There's more than one post in that thread, keep reading.
If he's not a classic example of a fucktard that would escalate to violence a situation that clearly doesn't call for it, then I don't know who is. His intent is clear, scratch car => spit => punch thrown => pull gun, which apparently he wouldn't use unless they pulled theirs.
Feel free to think that's the kind of person we should be handing out CCWs to, I'll feel free to think you're mildy retarded.
Unfortunately that's the way law works. We don't live in a Tom Cruise movie where a bunch of weirdos sit in a tub of goo and tell future cops with jetpacks who to arrest before they commit a crime. By that same logic we shouldn't give anyone drivers licenses or let people have babies. But feel free to continue to be a jerk and put words in my mouth. Jerk.
We'll his posting history indicates he carries, agreed that doesn't prove he's got a CCW.
What ass are you pulling this out of?
See above. Feel free to kiss that ass now.
I actually searched before making my post. The fact that he used "conceal" instead of "concealed" and never actually used the word "gun" in relation to his permit or anything else is why I could not find it. We need a better search function
Don't worry Stragi, I don't blame you for being massively out of touch with reality, you live in a continental sized disney land, your grasp on the normative is right up with there with mickey mouse's thoughts on the fake moon landings hurr.
Nick wrote:Don't worry Stragi, I don't blame you for being massively out of touch with reality, you live in a continental sized disney land, your grasp on the normative is right up with there with mickey mouse's thoughts on the fake moon landings hurr.
you live on an island with potatos and leprachauns and incest don't condesend to me you dirty scott
There are (acceptable?) limitations on the 1st Amendment, yes?
Why can't there be limitations on the 2nd Amendment as well?
To me, that statement doesn't read "THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR [AS MANY NUMBERS OF ANY TYPES OF] ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." And I think that's where we begin to not see eye-to-eye.
"It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant."- Barack Obama
Sylvus wrote:There are (acceptable?) limitations on the 1st Amendment, yes?
Why can't there be limitations on the 2nd Amendment as well?
To me, that statement doesn't read "THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR [AS MANY NUMBERS OF ANY TYPES OF] ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." And I think that's where we begin to not see eye-to-eye.
There are very few limitations on the 1st amendment. There are also already some limitations on the 2nd that are accepted even by the most pro-gun folks. The main reason for the 2nd Amendment being the written the way it is is so the people can have arms to fight an oppressive government (which as was stated above is EXACTLY what was happening when they wrote it). If the colonists here were armed with only spears or bows, what outcome do you think we would have seen?
Sylvus, I'm not trying to say people should be walking around with machine guns and artillery or anything, but if a responsible citizen wants to carry a firearm for protection, I don't think he should be denied that right. If that same responsible citizen wants a rifle to play with at the range or whatever, no big deal.
What we really need is an enhanced background check that looks into mental/medical history. If that means we need a longer waiting peroid or whatever, that's cool with me. Obama's stimulus package includes something like 20 billion for making all medical records electronic so that could make a new checking system easier.
Xyun wrote:Why, oh why is it so fucking hard for some of you to understand a simple sentence?
THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
It's the 2nd fucking amendment.
You don't have to like it, but you goddamn better well accept it.
a) Because it's an amendment, and it points to the fact that the constitution can and has been changed.
b) Because it's fucking out of date, or are you still wearing horsehair wigs, wooden teeth, and fighting the fucking crusades?
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
If the Second Amendment is there so that people can arm themselves to overthrow an oppressive government, I think everyone should have a gun. They should have several guns. However, they can only use those guns to overthrow an oppressive government. They can't use their guns to protect themselves from some crackhead thug. They can't use their guns to kill Bambi. When an oppressive government is knocking down their door, then they can use their fucking guns.
For the oppressed, peace is the absence of oppression, but for the oppressor, peace is the absence of resistance.
Aslanna wrote:Been awhile since I looked at the Constitution.. But which amendment is the right to fight fucking crusades?
I think that's in the body, you could check w/ the Bush administration if you like.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
