Page 21 of 25 FirstFirst ... 16171819202122232425 LastLast
Results 601 to 630 of 724

Thread: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

  1. #601
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Well, because if we wanted to have a rational discussion about the fact that a vast majority of homicides are committed with handguns, and really why do people need handguns when studies have shown that they are far more likely to cause harm to a family member, or to be used to threaten a family member, or to escalate an argument from minor violence to a homicide, then the "gun rights" people would have some force behind the argument that we're trying to take their guns away. Because they'd rather have access to an easily concealable cannon that can, and frequently is, used irrationally rather than forsake ownership of something that dangerous in order to truly attempt to cut down on gun violence.

    The assault rifle just has no viable non-military use that anyone has cogently argued, so it's an easy and valid target to ban. It doesn't matter that it's not the weapon that has been used in a majority of crimes: there is no reason for a civilian to own them, and even the fervent pro-"gun rights" Antonin Scalia conceded that states and the federal government could conceivably ban military-style weapons without running afoul of the 2nd amendment (never mind the fact that such a statement seems to run directly counter to any reasonable interpretation of an amendment that starts with a discussion of military force, but whatever.) Sometimes you have to pick your battles, and this one seems like it could be the most reasonably likely to gain even a modicum of support.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  2. #602
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    But go ahead: it won't help any. Defeatism gets us so much further.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  3. #603
    Peaceful Oasis TomAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Zenith, Winnemac
    Posts
    40,898

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    1/4 of the homicides.. but they're like what 1/10 of the guns? 1/20?
    Quote Originally Posted by efrain44 View Post
    Anyone know who the guy in the Cardinals jersey is? I've seen him in pictures on the board and I thought I saw him this year.

  4. #604
    old school Cheddar's Cousin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    La Quinta, CA
    Posts
    2,717

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Isn't the most important part of a rational discussion shouldn't the facts be addressed?

    The facts are, we want to reduce gun violence, and hand guns account for approximately 3/4 of all gun related homicides.

    The irrational conclusion is, "We must ban rifles".

    I don't understand your question, Tom.

    The stats I cited apply only to fire arms related homicides. Of those, 3/4 are committed with hand guns. The remainder are committed with all other types of rifles and shotguns combined. So called "assault" rifles are a much smaller portion of that number.
    Youth, you son of a bitch, where did you go?

    Quote Originally Posted by Emma Ocean View Post
    so I assume you've never been cunt punched at a festival? Well lucky you!

  5. #605
    Coachella Junkie jackstraw94086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    8,413

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheddar's Cousin View Post
    Isn't the most important part of a rational discussion shouldn't the facts be addressed?

    The facts are, we want to reduce gun violence, and hand guns account for approximately 3/4 of all gun related homicides.

    The irrational conclusion is, "We must ban rifles".


    I don't understand your question, Tom.

    The stats I cited apply only to fire arms related homicides. Of those, 3/4 are committed with hand guns. The remainder are committed with all other types of rifles and shotguns combined. So called "assault" rifles are a much smaller portion of that number.
    This is tired tired rhetoric.

    To dismiss one big problem because there also exists a bigger problem is retarded, and the argument will always be retarded every time it comes up again and again.
    The idea that removing assault weapons wont reduce gun violence because other guns cause more is completely indefensible and nonsensical.
    It's part of an obvious 2-part smokescreen. First you divert the issue by saying handguns are a bigger problem, then you mire the argument in all the problems associated with getting rid of handguns.

    That's pretty much what you're trying to do with your flawed syllogism there. Here's the more appropriate one with respect to assault weapons without confusing the issue.
    - we must reduce gun violence.
    - Assault weapons are responsible much gun violence (5-25% is still a huge problem), and have no practical defense use.
    - banning assault rifles WILL reduce gun violence.

    Handguns are an even more important issue that needs to be addressed as well. But's it's a separate issue. You can keep conflating them if you wish but it makes you and every gun nut look desperate and unable to defend assault weapons. Referring to them "so called 'assault'" or even "sporting" rifles is a weak ploy too.

  6. #606
    Banned marooko's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    In your mouth!
    Posts
    19,687

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    I've never wanted an "assault rifle", now I kinda do.

  7. #607
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by marooko View Post
    I've never wanted an "assault rifle", now I kinda do.
    Honest, serious question: what for? Why do you want it? What would you use it for? I'd love to see someone rationally explain why they should have an assault rifle if they aren't mercilessly killing arabs.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  8. #608
    Coachella Junkie jackstraw94086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    8,413

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    The only honest answer is that it's fun to shoot.

    I suppose "defense for the impending race war" would be honest for some.

  9. #609

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence



    I'm all for guns and explosives because videos like this. Booze and this event is my idea of awesome.

  10. #610
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    But couldn't you just go to a shooting range, rent those sorts of weapons, and not take them home with you? I mean, if the fun to shoot argument is the only thing that's valid in going for it, why isn't that a fair and equitable compromise? You still have access to those weapons, but in a controlled environment where there's very little chance of a severely misguided person taking them from your gun cabinet and laying waste to a public space.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  11. #611

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Its also why we can't have nice things.


    Serious note, I'm not defending guns. I wouldn't miss them if they were gone. Most gun owners are fucking idiots. I'm just going to enjoy them while I can.
    Last edited by Tubesock Shakur; 01-22-2013 at 10:22 PM.

  12. #612
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by jackstraw94086 View Post
    I suppose "defense for the impending race war" would be honest for some.
    Just write it the way that's intended. Killing bunches of hispanic and black Americans.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  13. #613
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by Tubesock Shakur View Post
    Its also why we can't have nice things.


    Serious note, I'm not defending guns. I wouldn't miss them if they were gone. Most gun owners are fucking idiots. I'm just going to enjoy them while I can.
    Oh I know. While I feel the same way, I honestly really enjoy shooting and would love to learn to hunt, mostly because eating pre-packaged and pre-butchered meat seems to dissociate oneself from the fact that a death created this meal. I'd like to, at very least, feel the responsibility (and, knowing myself, guilt) for harvesting the meat that I consume. I also live in a rural area where that's possible.

    That said, I do want an honest answer from someone who would like to, or does, own an assault rifle as to why that is something that makes sense to them. Because I can't find a single logical reason. Even the fun to shoot argument doesn't go anywhere if we can make a rational compromise like renting such a weapon at an approved shooting range where the guns are registered, monitored and tracked. Because I don't think there is a rational argument for it. I think the argument boils down to some sort of irrational, base fear that people have over some boogie-man that they believe will a) come and destroy their family or b) come and destroy their perceived liberties.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  14. #614

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Its the ultimate power. Defending life or taking life with the pull of a trigger at a moments notice is the ultimate freedom. Gun ownership is for the weak minded and poor as a last resort. There is no way anyone is taking away that freedom and sense of power from them. Charles Heston carried the motto to his grave and many follow it blindly.

  15. #615
    Dark Lord mountmccabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Mission
    Posts
    12,010

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by bmack86 View Post
    That said, I do want an honest answer from someone who would like to, or does, own an assault rifle as to why that is something that makes sense to them. Because I can't find a single logical reason.
    To be clear here, this is not me. I don't want to own an assault rifle.


    Quote Originally Posted by bmack86 View Post
    Even the fun to shoot argument doesn't go anywhere if we can make a rational compromise like renting such a weapon at an approved shooting range where the guns are registered, monitored and tracked. Because I don't think there is a rational argument for it. I think the argument boils down to some sort of irrational, base fear that people have over some boogie-man that they believe will a) come and destroy their family or b) come and destroy their perceived liberties.
    The base fear is a significant part of that.

    But.

    Some people love cars and motorcycles, far beyond wanting something that runs efficiently and consistently to get them to work and shows. They'll fix them up and keep them in good running condition and looking great. Some folks will collect cars. People will buy old motorcycles and take apart the engine and search online to replace a broken part and design and machine a custom fender. Whatever the fuck. I find cars dull and utilitarian and motorcycles frightening, but I get that some for some folks its an obsession. I had a roommate who had an old VW Bug AND a Harley. Dude was in the garage ALL THE TIME. Because he liked the things and he liked his control over it and the connection it gave.

    If say motorcycles (not realistic but more realistic than cars) were banned would someone like that accept as a reasonable compromise renting a motorcycle from an approve garage and using it on their oval? Sorry, no, you can't take this on a drive through the mountains or have any real connection to the piece, you get to drive around this oval. Clockwise only, please.

    Some folks upgrade and mod their computers constantly so they can play new games, sometimes writing their own code to control their environment. Some folks manage their CD and record collections, making playlists and searching for new music, making and mixing what they want. Some people like guns, trying new weapons and ammo, customizing them to fit their desires. All of these are about physicality and a series of different experiences.

    I don't think this means that semi-automatic weapons and big clips or whatever are necessary. Just that it isn't all fear.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoulDischarge View Post
    See how wrong you are, Tommy? Randy is agreeing with you.

  16. #616
    Peaceful Oasis TomAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Zenith, Winnemac
    Posts
    40,898

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    I think it would be fun to blow shit up. Keep your hands off my bombs Obama!
    Quote Originally Posted by efrain44 View Post
    Anyone know who the guy in the Cardinals jersey is? I've seen him in pictures on the board and I thought I saw him this year.

  17. #617
    old school
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Innerspace
    Posts
    3,307

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by bmack86 View Post
    but in a controlled environment where there's very little chance of a severely misguided person taking them from your gun cabinet and laying waste to a public space.
    This is why we are having this debate because one idiot decided to teach her mentally unstable child to use firearms and leave them unlocked for anybody to use. You have a responsibility to secure all firearms with a trigger lock or a locked safe as a gun owner. A horrible tragedy that could've easily been prevented with a few $10 trigger locks and a tiny bit of intellect.
    "Oh this uncertainty is taking me over"

  18. #618
    old school Cheddar's Cousin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    La Quinta, CA
    Posts
    2,717

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by jackstraw94086 View Post
    This is tired tired rhetoric.

    To dismiss one big problem because there also exists a bigger problem is retarded, and the argument will always be retarded every time it comes up again and again.
    The idea that removing assault weapons wont reduce gun violence because other guns cause more is completely indefensible and nonsensical.
    It's part of an obvious 2-part smokescreen. First you divert the issue by saying handguns are a bigger problem, then you mire the argument in all the problems associated with getting rid of handguns.

    That's pretty much what you're trying to do with your flawed syllogism there. Here's the more appropriate one with respect to assault weapons without confusing the issue.
    - we must reduce gun violence.
    - Assault weapons are responsible much gun violence (5-25% is still a huge problem), and have no practical defense use.
    - banning assault rifles WILL reduce gun violence.

    Handguns are an even more important issue that needs to be addressed as well. But's it's a separate issue. You can keep conflating them if you wish but it makes you and every gun nut look desperate and unable to defend assault weapons. Referring to them "so called 'assault'" or even "sporting" rifles is a weak ploy too.
    On the contrary...I do not dismiss the issue of handguns. I believe I pointed out that it is the biggest issue in the debate and therefore should be addressed first. That is the exact opposite of a diversion. It is people like you who are confusing the discussion with the red herring of "assault" rifles because they look scarier and produce a more emotional response among the uniformed masses.

    I'm not defending anything here other than the value of an honest discussion. I am not a gun nut in any way. The only two guns I own are an Air Soft and a pellet gun. I have no plans to ever purchase any fire arms. So, I don't see the government coming after me any time soon.

    How about a nice climate change syllogism?

    -We must reduce carbon emissions.
    -Hybrid cars emit carbon (up to 50% as much as the most fuel efficient mid size cars)
    -Let's ban hybrids

    While true...banning hybrids (and not replacing them with standard internal combustion engine autos)will logically reduce emissions, it should not be the first line of action in controlling the larger issue of carbon emissions.

    I hope you can agree with that.
    Youth, you son of a bitch, where did you go?

    Quote Originally Posted by Emma Ocean View Post
    so I assume you've never been cunt punched at a festival? Well lucky you!

  19. #619
    Banned marooko's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    In your mouth!
    Posts
    19,687

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Take the guns, just leave my drugs and alcohol alone.

  20. #620
    Peaceful Oasis TomAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Zenith, Winnemac
    Posts
    40,898

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheddar's Cousin View Post
    I believe I pointed out that it is the biggest issue in the debate and therefore should be addressed first.
    I disagree. You gather the low-hanging fruit first. Assault rifles are the easy first step. Then you work on the harder problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by efrain44 View Post
    Anyone know who the guy in the Cardinals jersey is? I've seen him in pictures on the board and I thought I saw him this year.

  21. #621
    Coachella Junkie jackstraw94086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    8,413

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheddar's Cousin View Post
    On the contrary...I do not dismiss the issue of handguns. I believe I pointed out that it is the biggest issue in the debate and therefore should be addressed first. That is the exact opposite of a diversion. It is people like you who are confusing the discussion with the red herring of "assault" rifles because they look scarier and produce a more emotional response among the uniformed masses.

    I'm not defending anything here other than the value of an honest discussion. I am not a gun nut in any way. The only two guns I own are an Air Soft and a pellet gun. I have no plans to ever purchase any fire arms. So, I don't see the government coming after me any time soon.

    How about a nice climate change syllogism?

    -We must reduce carbon emissions.
    -Hybrid cars emit carbon (up to 50% as much as the most fuel efficient mid size cars)
    -Let's ban hybrids

    While true...banning hybrids (and not replacing them with standard internal combustion engine autos)will logically reduce emissions, it should not be the first line of action in controlling the larger issue of carbon emissions.

    I hope you can agree with that.
    I was careful not to call you a gun nut, only that you're making the same argument as gun nuts.
    I don't agree with your climate change argument at all. The there is no analogy of assault weapons to hybrid vehicles.

    A) hybrids are already a measure to mitigate poor fuel economy (and indirectly carbon emissions). Having assault weapons around is not a way to mitigate gun violence.
    B) People buy hybrids because they need to drive. If you banned them then they'd be replaced by conventional vehicles, resulting in MORE carbon emissions. People don't buy assault rifles out of necessity (regardless of their fantasy defense scenarios)

    You seem to refuse to accept the point of attacking assault weapons, which is that it is a more realistic issue to solve near term (quickly).
    And you also seem to insist on accusing proponents of assault weapons banning of avoiding the obvious larger issue, which they are simply NOT, it will just take more time.

    So in order to understand your position can you confirm what you're actually saying, do you believe:
    A)Attacking handguns first actually is a faster way to reduce gun violence?
    B) assault weapons ban will actually not reduce gun violence.
    C) other.
    Last edited by jackstraw94086; 01-23-2013 at 09:54 AM.

  22. #622
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheddar's Cousin View Post
    On the contrary...I do not dismiss the issue of handguns. I believe I pointed out that it is the biggest issue in the debate and therefore should be addressed first. That is the exact opposite of a diversion. It is people like you who are confusing the discussion with the red herring of "assault" rifles because they look scarier and produce a more emotional response among the uniformed masses.

    I'm not defending anything here other than the value of an honest discussion. I am not a gun nut in any way. The only two guns I own are an Air Soft and a pellet gun. I have no plans to ever purchase any fire arms. So, I don't see the government coming after me any time soon.

    How about a nice climate change syllogism?

    -We must reduce carbon emissions.
    -Hybrid cars emit carbon (up to 50% as much as the most fuel efficient mid size cars)
    -Let's ban hybrids

    While true...banning hybrids (and not replacing them with standard internal combustion engine autos)will logically reduce emissions, it should not be the first line of action in controlling the larger issue of carbon emissions.

    I hope you can agree with that.
    As Jack states, this is a false comparison. If you want the more accurate comparison it would be:

    Climate change is an issue, and emissions are a large factor of that.

    Yes, all cars create emissions. However, cars such as Hummers, Expeditions and other large, gas-guzzling SUVs create emissions at a much quicker rate and have the ability to cause more widespread damage. As a result, while they are not as widespread, we will ban these because they have the capability of creating much more destruction.

    The hybrid in your analogy is a pellet gun, an airsoft rifle, maybe a musket. Acknowledged, it still has some issues, but it's not as glaringly destructive.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  23. #623
    The Encyclopedia bmack86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    28,184

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by mountmccabe View Post
    To be clear here, this is not me. I don't want to own an assault rifle.

    The base fear is a significant part of that.

    But.

    Some people love cars and motorcycles, far beyond wanting something that runs efficiently and consistently to get them to work and shows. They'll fix them up and keep them in good running condition and looking great. Some folks will collect cars. People will buy old motorcycles and take apart the engine and search online to replace a broken part and design and machine a custom fender. Whatever the fuck. I find cars dull and utilitarian and motorcycles frightening, but I get that some for some folks its an obsession. I had a roommate who had an old VW Bug AND a Harley. Dude was in the garage ALL THE TIME. Because he liked the things and he liked his control over it and the connection it gave.

    If say motorcycles (not realistic but more realistic than cars) were banned would someone like that accept as a reasonable compromise renting a motorcycle from an approve garage and using it on their oval? Sorry, no, you can't take this on a drive through the mountains or have any real connection to the piece, you get to drive around this oval. Clockwise only, please.

    Some folks upgrade and mod their computers constantly so they can play new games, sometimes writing their own code to control their environment. Some folks manage their CD and record collections, making playlists and searching for new music, making and mixing what they want. Some people like guns, trying new weapons and ammo, customizing them to fit their desires. All of these are about physicality and a series of different experiences.

    I don't think this means that semi-automatic weapons and big clips or whatever are necessary. Just that it isn't all fear.
    Thank you. That I can understand, even if I still find it confounding and somewhat terrifying, as collecting and modding and improving weapons ultimately means that someone will have intense weaponry that is more efficient in killing. And that's the problem I have with gun collecting as opposed to other collections: you are collecting implements of death, tools which have the express purpose of killing something and doing so well. Cars, as much as the obsessives baffle me, have a more utilitarian purpose. And yes, there's target practice, but as most targets make clear by creating silhouettes of people or animals, it's practice to improve accuracy and efficiency when using a weapon, even if most people never use it for that purpose.
    Quote Originally Posted by canexplain View Post
    Remember Hitler? I don't but here we are again .. cr****

  24. #624
    Coachella Junkie jackstraw94086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    8,413

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by mountmccabe View Post
    If say motorcycles (not realistic but more realistic than cars) were banned would someone like that accept as a reasonable compromise renting a motorcycle from an approve garage and using it on their oval? Sorry, no, you can't take this on a drive through the mountains or have any real connection to the piece, you get to drive around this oval. Clockwise only, please.

    Some folks upgrade and mod their computers constantly so they can play new games, sometimes writing their own code to control their environment. Some folks manage their CD and record collections, making playlists and searching for new music, making and mixing what they want. Some people like guns, trying new weapons and ammo, customizing them to fit their desires. All of these are about physicality and a series of different experiences.

    I don't think this means that semi-automatic weapons and big clips or whatever are necessary. Just that it isn't all fear.
    The motorcycle argument resonates with me as an owner, but the link between motorcycles and assault weapons is tenuous. Even if motorcycles had no practical value (which they most certainly do, but let's just say they didn't) I would still have to strongly reconsider my attachment to them if their original purpose to kill several to dozens of people. Especially if that were still happening up to several times a year in the hands of people that might have otherwise not been able to do it if there were stronger restrictions. A child or a criminal, or even a temporarily distraught person, would have a MUCH harder time murdering people with my motorcycle than with a gun. (actually the government already makes it harder to legally own a motorcycle than a gun).

    I don't think guns should be given the same considerations as a hobby as other less lethal endeavors. Sure I might change my mind if I got into ARs as a hobby. But I somehow don't think so. Not all rights and liberties should be guaranteed evenly when those liberties present a clear danger to others without benefiting society in a significant way.

  25. #625
    Coachella Junkie chairmenmeow47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    aquabania
    Posts
    17,533

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    the value of motorcycles is to make things convenient for you while making things inconvenient for everyone else. real talk.
    Quote Originally Posted by malcolmjamalawesome View Post
    It's when we discuss Coachella that we are at our collective dipshittiest.

  26. #626
    Coachella Junkie jackstraw94086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    8,413

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by chairmenmeow47 View Post
    the value of motorcycles is to make things convenient for you while making things inconvenient for everyone else. real talk.
    I would love to hear how motorcycles make things inconvenient for you.

  27. #627
    Coachella Junkie chairmenmeow47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    aquabania
    Posts
    17,533

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    i fully admit that not every motorcycle has all of these problems, but many have some if not all.


    • loud as all fuck. sometimes with every movement (hells angels types) others when they decide to speed up really fast.
    • driving in-between lanes just because they can, which generally includes speeding and makes it harder for them to be seen when other people are trying to change lanes in crowded traffic. also, this makes it difficult to anticipate where they are going, so the rest of us have to wait until princess motorcycle makes their move.
    • those who travel in packs tend to go over the line in lanes.
    • tailgating us and overall driving aggressively while expecting us to leave more space for them (especially in az where helmets are not required and rarely worn).
    • quickly weaving in-between cars in different lanes where there is hardly any space (definitely not enough space for a car), which again, requires all of us to back the fuck up and give them a shitload of space until they cut someone else off.



    i don't doubt fuel efficiency and motorcycles being a cheaper mode of transportation for some. but aggressive and loud motorcycle drivers appear to be the majority on the freeway.
    Quote Originally Posted by malcolmjamalawesome View Post
    It's when we discuss Coachella that we are at our collective dipshittiest.

  28. #628
    Banned marooko's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    In your mouth!
    Posts
    19,687

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Many people who own guns have great respect for them, the people around them and have lived their entire lives without issue. They're grouped with the crowd that fucks up. So for the sake of this argument, all motorcycles and riders will also be grouped together.

  29. #629
    old school Cheddar's Cousin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    La Quinta, CA
    Posts
    2,717

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Quote Originally Posted by jackstraw94086 View Post
    So in order to understand your position can you confirm what you're actually saying, do you believe:
    A)Attacking handguns first actually is a faster way to reduce gun violence?
    B) assault weapons ban will actually not reduce gun violence.
    C) other.
    I believe that we need to take the emotion out of the debate and address the actual facts. Fire arms violence is overwhelmingly committed more often with hand guns. These violent acts are almost always committed with hand guns that are illegally possessed and/or concealed. If we want to reduce gun violence by a significant amount, we should mitigate the most significant factor.

    Thank you for not calling me a gun nut.



    Quote Originally Posted by chairmenmeow47 View Post
    • loud as all fuck. sometimes with every movement (hells angels types) others when they decide to speed up really fast.
    • driving in-between lanes just because they can, which generally includes speeding and makes it harder for them to be seen when other people are trying to change lanes in crowded traffic. also, this makes it difficult to anticipate where they are going, so the rest of us have to wait until princess motorcycle makes their move.
    • those who travel in packs tend to go over the line in lanes.
    • tailgating us and overall driving aggressively while expecting us to leave more space for them (especially in az where helmets are not required and rarely worn).
    • quickly weaving in-between cars in different lanes where there is hardly any space (definitely not enough space for a car), which again, requires all of us to back the fuck up and give them a shitload of space until they cut someone else off.
    Motorcycles don't cause these problems...motorcyclists do
    Last edited by Cheddar's Cousin; 01-23-2013 at 12:50 PM.
    Youth, you son of a bitch, where did you go?

    Quote Originally Posted by Emma Ocean View Post
    so I assume you've never been cunt punched at a festival? Well lucky you!

  30. #630
    Peaceful Oasis TomAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Zenith, Winnemac
    Posts
    40,898

    Default Re: In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

    Red herring. Just because a dressed up squirrel gun looks military grade does not mean that actual military grade weapons aren't in public possession.
    Quote Originally Posted by efrain44 View Post
    Anyone know who the guy in the Cardinals jersey is? I've seen him in pictures on the board and I thought I saw him this year.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 248
    Last Post: 12-17-2012, 12:53 PM
  2. Violence in the Campgrounds BY SECURITY
    By jirish1321 in forum Questions
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 04-22-2010, 10:28 AM
  3. Replies: 395
    Last Post: 12-05-2009, 03:57 PM
  4. violence against kroqken
    By bug on your lip in forum Music Lounge
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 10-25-2009, 07:14 PM
  5. GUNS!!
    By marooko in forum Misc. Lounge
    Replies: 261
    Last Post: 07-08-2008, 11:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •