This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Lemy the Lizerd
Pages: 1 ... 303132 3334 ... 67
931
« on: December 21, 2014, 08:33:36 PM »
 Here's Ed Miliband kicking a protestor.
932
« on: December 21, 2014, 07:40:39 PM »
Any secular dictator is better than an Islamic fundamentalist regime.
And that's exactly what Assad wants you to believe. That's literally his entire basis of support. "It's either us or else the minorities are going to be killed."
Of course he's excluding the part that his policies led directly to this "choice" between a secular dictator and an Islamic fundamentalist regime.
He's not lying, though. It *is* a choice between secular assholes and religious loony assholes. Between the two I think I'll side with the guys who aren't taping beheadings of civilians. I'd like an elaboration of your claim that Assad set this whole thing up. It's interesting.
933
« on: December 21, 2014, 07:12:12 PM »
Any secular dictator is better than an Islamic fundamentalist regime.
934
« on: December 21, 2014, 03:02:09 PM »
935
« on: December 21, 2014, 01:49:56 PM »
 One thing I love about Putin is how he behaves around other leaders. When he's around Merkel, he brings his dog, Koni, because she has a fear of dogs. This allows him to take the dominant position when the two meet.
936
« on: December 21, 2014, 11:11:00 AM »
The biggest flaw with private gun sale checks
>using maymays in Serious
937
« on: December 21, 2014, 10:42:27 AM »
So try and get it changed.
That's exactly what they're doing.
938
« on: December 21, 2014, 10:03:49 AM »
It also fucks up private sales by making them a big hassle. How are you supposed to run a background check for a private sale?
http://answers.usa.gov/system/templates/selfservice/USAGov/#!portal/1012/article/3350/Background-Checks
http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Universal_Background_Checks_for_Gun_Purchases,_Initiative_594_%282014%29
The measure was designed to require background checks to be run on every person purchasing a gun in the state of Washington, even those who do so via private sales. However, transfers of antique guns and those between immediate family members are exempt from the background checks. The measure also required that dealers who are facilitating gun transfers - whether they are through the licensed dealer or a private seller - receive confirmation in writing from the chief of police or sheriff that the purchaser in question "is eligible to possess a pistol [...] and that the application to purchase is approved by the chief of police or sheriff." Furthermore, the initiative rendered it illegal to hand off a firearm to people outside a person's immediate family, though exceptions were mentioned, including situations in which people are at a shooting range or hunting.[1][2]
Ok.
What's the problem? The exceptions take care of potential misunderstandings. Otherwise, people should not be handling your firearm. If your friend wants to shoot your gun, he/she can legally do so at a firing range.
At the end of the day, all I see is people complaining background checks are now necessary for all sales, twisting the wording of the law to make it seem as if you hand your buddy your pistol for a second the secret police are going to take you both and torture you to death. More ignorance and fear mongering from the gun nuts. Shocking.
"hurrr muh gun nuts"
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know I had to be politically correct with you.
What if I have a visitor in my home who would like to get a feel of the action of my new rifle, to see if he should get one himself? It is unloaded. Should this be a crime? No. I don't see how you'd get arrested for it either. Pigs aren't looking through your window, won't know if he's family or not, and would need a warrant to enter your home which they wouldn't get. There's also this awesome invention called "curtains". If I were you, I wouldn't tell people where I had my gun anyway. If they wanted to try it, I'd drive to a gun range and let him/her shoot it instead of holding it unloaded in my house.
This argument is pretty stupid coming from someone who claims not to like government interference. Background checks are extremely necessary. It's the good kind of government interference. Private sale or not, background checks need to be done. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white
So instead of fixing a broken law, I'm supposed to commit a felony because nobody will ever know?
Maybe you shouldn't be letting strangers handle your gun unless you're in a shooting range?
And really, I doubt you're going to be arrested for letting somebody hold your gun for a minute because he wants to check it out not only that, you have the exceptions you can call back on, notably loaning it for hunting. What's the officer going to say? "I don't think that's true"?
I just don't see how you think you're going to wind up in prison when nobody will find out and you have these exceptions in the law.
Who said it was a stranger? This argument is really stupid. Should sodomy laws be kept in place too, because they can't be enforced? Background checks for sales are okay, but there is no reason to require one for physically holding a fucking gun.
939
« on: December 21, 2014, 09:55:36 AM »
It also fucks up private sales by making them a big hassle. How are you supposed to run a background check for a private sale?
http://answers.usa.gov/system/templates/selfservice/USAGov/#!portal/1012/article/3350/Background-Checks
http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Universal_Background_Checks_for_Gun_Purchases,_Initiative_594_%282014%29
The measure was designed to require background checks to be run on every person purchasing a gun in the state of Washington, even those who do so via private sales. However, transfers of antique guns and those between immediate family members are exempt from the background checks. The measure also required that dealers who are facilitating gun transfers - whether they are through the licensed dealer or a private seller - receive confirmation in writing from the chief of police or sheriff that the purchaser in question "is eligible to possess a pistol [...] and that the application to purchase is approved by the chief of police or sheriff." Furthermore, the initiative rendered it illegal to hand off a firearm to people outside a person's immediate family, though exceptions were mentioned, including situations in which people are at a shooting range or hunting.[1][2]
Ok.
What's the problem? The exceptions take care of potential misunderstandings. Otherwise, people should not be handling your firearm. If your friend wants to shoot your gun, he/she can legally do so at a firing range.
At the end of the day, all I see is people complaining background checks are now necessary for all sales, twisting the wording of the law to make it seem as if you hand your buddy your pistol for a second the secret police are going to take you both and torture you to death. More ignorance and fear mongering from the gun nuts. Shocking.
"hurrr muh gun nuts"
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know I had to be politically correct with you.
What if I have a visitor in my home who would like to get a feel of the action of my new rifle, to see if he should get one himself? It is unloaded. Should this be a crime? No. I don't see how you'd get arrested for it either. Pigs aren't looking through your window, won't know if he's family or not, and would need a warrant to enter your home which they wouldn't get. There's also this awesome invention called "curtains". If I were you, I wouldn't tell people where I had my gun anyway. If they wanted to try it, I'd drive to a gun range and let him/her shoot it instead of holding it unloaded in my house.
This argument is pretty stupid coming from someone who claims not to like government interference. Background checks are extremely necessary. It's the good kind of government interference. Private sale or not, background checks need to be done. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white
So instead of fixing a broken law, I'm supposed to commit a felony because nobody will ever know?
940
« on: December 21, 2014, 09:44:22 AM »
It also fucks up private sales by making them a big hassle. How are you supposed to run a background check for a private sale?
http://answers.usa.gov/system/templates/selfservice/USAGov/#!portal/1012/article/3350/Background-Checks
http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Universal_Background_Checks_for_Gun_Purchases,_Initiative_594_%282014%29
The measure was designed to require background checks to be run on every person purchasing a gun in the state of Washington, even those who do so via private sales. However, transfers of antique guns and those between immediate family members are exempt from the background checks. The measure also required that dealers who are facilitating gun transfers - whether they are through the licensed dealer or a private seller - receive confirmation in writing from the chief of police or sheriff that the purchaser in question "is eligible to possess a pistol [...] and that the application to purchase is approved by the chief of police or sheriff." Furthermore, the initiative rendered it illegal to hand off a firearm to people outside a person's immediate family, though exceptions were mentioned, including situations in which people are at a shooting range or hunting.[1][2]
Ok.
What's the problem? The exceptions take care of potential misunderstandings. Otherwise, people should not be handling your firearm. If your friend wants to shoot your gun, he/she can legally do so at a firing range.
At the end of the day, all I see is people complaining background checks are now necessary for all sales, twisting the wording of the law to make it seem as if you hand your buddy your pistol for a second the secret police are going to take you both and torture you to death. More ignorance and fear mongering from the gun nuts. Shocking.
"hurrr muh gun nuts" What if I have a visitor in my home who would like to get a feel of the action of my new rifle, to see if he should get one himself? It is unloaded. Should this be a crime? This argument is pretty stupid coming from someone who claims not to like government interference.
941
« on: December 21, 2014, 09:35:57 AM »
It also fucks up private sales by making them a big hassle. How are you supposed to run a background check for a private sale?
http://answers.usa.gov/system/templates/selfservice/USAGov/#!portal/1012/article/3350/Background-Checks
http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Universal_Background_Checks_for_Gun_Purchases,_Initiative_594_%282014%29The measure was designed to require background checks to be run on every person purchasing a gun in the state of Washington, even those who do so via private sales. However, transfers of antique guns and those between immediate family members are exempt from the background checks. The measure also required that dealers who are facilitating gun transfers - whether they are through the licensed dealer or a private seller - receive confirmation in writing from the chief of police or sheriff that the purchaser in question "is eligible to possess a pistol [...] and that the application to purchase is approved by the chief of police or sheriff." Furthermore, the initiative rendered it illegal to hand off a firearm to people outside a person's immediate family, though exceptions were mentioned, including situations in which people are at a shooting range or hunting.[1][2]
942
« on: December 21, 2014, 09:27:33 AM »
It's about background checks for all sales. Why would anybody be against that?
It would be nice if that was actually what it did, but they fucked the wording up so bad that it basically means you need a background check to hand a gun to another person. It also fucks up private sales by making them a big hassle. How are you supposed to run a background check for a private sale?
943
« on: December 21, 2014, 09:17:35 AM »
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/1000-gathered-largest-felony-civil-disobedience-rally-history/Olympia, WA — Over the weekend the largest felony civil disobedience rally ever held in American history took place. It is estimated that anywhere from 1,000 to 3,000 well armed gun owners showed up to the state capital in Olympia to openly violate the unconstitutional gun law, i594.
The event’s organizer, who frequently appears on the Free Thought Project, Gavin Seim, made the extraordinary nature of the rally very clear,
“This isn’t just a protest. We are here to openly violate the law.”
On his website Seim explains the ominous nature of the legislation:
"On Nov 4th 2014 a piece of legislation called i594 passed in Washington State (read text). It will make so much as handing a gun to a friend a felony. While this started here in Washington, it was funded by big out of State money and you are next."
Seim goes on to emphasize the importance of this day of resistance:
"This stand is about all of America. It’s about public officials deciding if they will keep their oath, or support tyranny. It’s about us deciding if we will stand or allow liberty to be lost.
On Dec 13th we gather for the largest Felony civil disobedience rally in American history. Thousands are coming to stand at the capital in Olympia. This is not simply a protest. We will openly exchange, buy and sell and trade guns and start a plan to break apart this legislation and violate i594 in every possible way. Because ALL law that violates the Constitution is not law, it is VOID!
We the people will not tolerate this law. We will not bow down and lick the boots of tyrants, we will stand for the liberty of our children? We’re not waiting for politicians, judges or lawyers. Our birthright is NOT to be touched. We gather and we will affirm that liberty."
Original RSVP’s grew to over 6,000, so police decided that it would be in their best interests not to enforce the law. The Washington State Patrol announced there would be no arrests for exchanging guns – not even for selling guns.
Like the professional liberty flexing guru that he is, Seim refused to even obtain a permit to hold the rally, citing the right of people to peaceably assemble.
The sheer number of people that showed up, along with the attendance of lawmakers and even law enforcement, made this event hard to dismiss as a fringe group of people, “clinging to their guns.”
Despite there being over a thousand loaded weapons, the protest went off without incident. Washington State Trooper Guy Gill predicted beforehand, “Most of these folks are responsible gun owners. We probably will not have an issue.”
According to Townhall.com Another rally in Olympia is planned for January 15, and another one in Spokane on December 20. The Second Amendment Foundation, headquartered in Bellevue, intends to sue the state over I-594, and will be lobbying the legislature to get the law changed or repealed.
We commend Gav Seim’s efforts to organize such an amazingly powerful and effective protest. This is how change is sought, and made.  F R E E D O M R E E D O M
944
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:18:42 PM »
Can we just stop talking about this shit?
You can stop if you want. I won't.
You realize you can't stop corruption by whining on the internet?
We can though. See, advertisers are not fans of controversy. And you need advertisers if you want to run a website.
Take serious and legal action. Otherwise this is just laughable.
hue
Actually, all this shit has just given these losers publicity and page views.
Seriously, this is a joke.
Clearly you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. They're bleeding advertisers. We hit Gawker so hard they're trying to hide their advertisers (which is illegal).
And? These people still hold their ridiculous opinions and will continue to be in bed with developers.
We can't fix their delusional minds, but we can make it career suicide to associate with them.
But you're giving them all the ammunition and justification they need for their little justice crusade. In the long run, these people will be replaced by similar people and nothing will have been gained.
It's nice that you have a magical time machine and know the future, but I'm gonna keep going anyway.
945
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:14:30 PM »
Weeeellllll .22 is a good place to start because it's got next to no recoil and it's cheap, but it got bought up after Sandy Hook so it's harder to find.
Mosin Nagants are cheap but 7.62x54r will kick your ass.
An SKS firing 7.62x39 will be cheap, and the ammo will be too, plus it comes with a cool built in bayonet. May be caked in cosmoline for storage though, you would have to clean that out. Nagants come in cosmoline too.
946
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:12:43 PM »
>reading western propaganda
947
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:12:21 PM »
Source?
it's old news but I read about it a few months back. I can't be assed to google it though.
948
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:11:25 PM »
Any proof he shot civilians on purpose?
He's said it himself.
He would leave AKs out on the ground, hole up on a roof and shoot anyone who tried to pick them up.
I would like the read his full statement. But as far as I'm concerned, he also stated to CNN that he had to do what he needed in order to defend this fellow Marines. Someplace like Afghanistan and some bystander is carrying an AK? Yeah, there's something suspicious going on
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/03/us/texas-sniper-killed-kyle-profile/
Well of course he'd say that, he probably thought killing a bunch of civilians would make the marines safer, too. Kyle was a racist, delusional scumbag and his behavior and attitudes were an insult to the US armed forces.
949
« on: December 20, 2014, 10:09:18 PM »
1 and 2.
950
« on: December 20, 2014, 05:42:07 PM »
Any proof he shot civilians on purpose?
He's said it himself. He would leave AKs out on the ground, hole up on a roof and shoot anyone who tried to pick them up.
951
« on: December 20, 2014, 05:38:43 PM »
Can we just stop talking about this shit?
You can stop if you want. I won't.
You realize you can't stop corruption by whining on the internet?
We can though. See, advertisers are not fans of controversy. And you need advertisers if you want to run a website.
Take serious and legal action. Otherwise this is just laughable.
hue
Actually, all this shit has just given these losers publicity and page views.
Seriously, this is a joke.
Clearly you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. They're bleeding advertisers. We hit Gawker so hard they're trying to hide their advertisers (which is illegal).
And? These people still hold their ridiculous opinions and will continue to be in bed with developers.
We can't fix their delusional minds, but we can make it career suicide to associate with them.
953
« on: December 20, 2014, 05:19:11 PM »
Can we just stop talking about this shit?
You can stop if you want. I won't.
You realize you can't stop corruption by whining on the internet?
We can though. See, advertisers are not fans of controversy. And you need advertisers if you want to run a website.
Take serious and legal action. Otherwise this is just laughable.
hue
Actually, all this shit has just given these losers publicity and page views.
Seriously, this is a joke.
Clearly you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. They're bleeding advertisers. We hit Gawker so hard they're trying to hide their advertisers (which is illegal).
954
« on: December 20, 2014, 05:15:48 PM »
955
« on: December 20, 2014, 05:02:21 PM »
Can we just stop talking about this shit?
You can stop if you want. I won't.
You realize you can't stop corruption by whining on the internet?
We can though. See, advertisers are not fans of controversy. And you need advertisers if you want to run a website. Take serious and legal action. Otherwise this is just laughable.
hue
956
« on: December 20, 2014, 03:54:27 PM »
Can we just stop talking about this shit?
You can stop if you want. I won't.
957
« on: December 20, 2014, 03:53:38 PM »
ITT: californian butthurt
958
« on: December 20, 2014, 01:25:05 PM »
Holy fuck I am surrounded by autists
959
« on: December 20, 2014, 12:41:49 PM »
. inb4 HUUUURRRRRR I DONT CARE STOP TALKING ABOUT THINGS I DONT CARE ABOUT
960
« on: December 20, 2014, 12:25:27 PM »
smd
Pages: 1 ... 303132 3334 ... 67
|
Show Posts
