Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Congrats, gun lovers, you've done it again Options · View
elitfromnorth
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 4:57:09 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,589
Location: Burrowed, Norway
http://news.yahoo.com/police-ky-girl-2-accidentally-shot-killed-022542966.html

I'm wondering if any of you can defend learning a 5 year old not only to use a weapon, but also giving it to him/her. The US has always had strange laws to me; at 16 some states think you're responsible enough to drive, however don't you dare trying to get into someone's pants until you're 18. At 18 you're responsible enough to vote, but still not responsible enough to have a drink(legally). But even though they think you have to wait until you're 21 to drink, they think it's perfectly ok that there are weapons manufactured meant to be given to young children! How the hell can anyone say that "oh this is all the parents fault" when there are actually guns manufactured to suit children?

In this particular case, sure, parents are to blame and maybe they're all already being punished enough, and that's not I want to discuss. I'm wondering if you lot think something is very much wrong in the US when they give guns to 5 yo's. I think it is not just wrong, I think it's so fucked up that they flew by the line in the sand at ultrasonic speed.

Edit; here's a picture of the rifle he used, made from Keystone Sporting Arms



"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 5:18:41 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,082
Location: United States
Allowing a 5-year-old to have unsupervised access to a firearm is worse than indefensible - it should be a criminal act. In most states it is. But it's still not a "gun" problem - it's a people problem - a parenting problem. Don't blame me because a toddler got killed. Don't blame "gun lovers" - we had nothing to do with it. Blame the parents.

Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 5:30:30 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,579
Location: California
MrNudiePants wrote:
Allowing a 5-year-old to have unsupervised access to a firearm is worse than indefensible - it should be a criminal act. In most states it is. But it's still not a "gun" problem - it's a people problem - a parenting problem. Don't blame me because a toddler got killed. Don't blame "gun lovers" - we had nothing to do with it. Blame the parents.


If guns don't kill people and it's people that kill people like you blow hard all the time... Then Why are bombs illegal? Why does the US and the world not allow certain countries to have atomic weapons? It's not like the bombs get up and walk all on their own and then blow themselves up... A person has to do it. Why is there a double standard nudie? I mean if the terrorists that bombed the Boston marathon had AR-15s instead of bombs they might have killed more people than with a bomb... Why is it that bombs are illegal then? If it's not the weapon we need to focus on but the people like you say why are other weapons that kill a lot of people banned?

I don't expect you to be able to muster up the brain power to answer by the way.



CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 5:35:57 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 465
Location: United States
I read the article posted by Elitfromnorth. The gun was sitting in a corner and nobody realized that there was a bullet in it.

Just one mistake and a child dies, though we could argue there were several mistakes made in this case.

Why do I get the feeling that the parents in this case were "Gun Lovers"?
elitfromnorth
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 5:40:51 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,589
Location: Burrowed, Norway
MrNudiePants wrote:
Allowing a 5-year-old to have unsupervised access to a firearm is worse than indefensible - it should be a criminal act. In most states it is. But it's still not a "gun" problem - it's a people problem - a parenting problem. Don't blame me because a toddler got killed. Don't blame "gun lovers" - we had nothing to do with it. Blame the parents.


So you think it's quite ok that a company produces weapons aimed at children? As I said, the blame of the parents is not the point of this thread. I'm wondering if you think it's ok that there are weapons made especially for 5 yo kids...

Also, Jack has proved a fairly good point...

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 5:52:06 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,082
Location: United States
elitfromnorth wrote:


So you think it's quite ok that a company produces weapons aimed at children? As I said, the blame of the parents is not the point of this thread. I'm wondering if you think it's ok that there are weapons made especially for 5 yo kids...

Also, Jack has proved a fairly good point...


I don't read Magic Jack's posts. As soon as I see his idiotic avatar, I just scroll down. That said, no, I don't have anything against the company that made the rifle. There are all kinds of companies that make all kinds of products that are geared towards children. There are child-sized motorcycles, motorized cars, rockets propelled by extremely flammable solid propellants, swimming apparel -- hell, hell, over 700 children drown every year. Swimming pools, motorbikes, firearms - these are all products that should only be used by children under strict parental supervision.

As for "the blame of the parents is not the point of the thread"...

Why would you even start a thread, knowing that it's going to be as contentious as you MUST know that this one will be, and then get offended when someone posts an opposing position?

Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 5:58:15 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,579
Location: California
MrNudiePants wrote:


I don't read Magic Jack's posts. As soon as I see his idiotic avatar, I just scroll down.


I told you he wouldn't be able to muster up the brain power to answer the question. He might as well admit I am right and he's too stupid to even defend himself.

It would be good for someone else to just copy and paste my question and ask him since he put up his well developed blinders that he uses when cornered by logic. Then he will have no excuse to not answer.



elitfromnorth
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 6:12:15 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,589
Location: Burrowed, Norway
MrNudiePants wrote:


I don't read Magic Jack's posts. As soon as I see his idiotic avatar, I just scroll down. That said, no, I don't have anything against the company that made the rifle. There are all kinds of companies that make all kinds of products that are geared towards children. There are child-sized motorcycles, motorized cars, rockets propelled by extremely flammable solid propellants, swimming apparel -- hell, hell, over 700 children drown every year. Swimming pools, motorbikes, firearms - these are all products that should only be used by children under strict parental supervision.

As for "the blame of the parents is not the point of the thread"...

Why would you even start a thread, knowing that it's going to be as contentious as you MUST know that this one will be, and then get offended when someone posts an opposing position?


Who said I got offended? I don't offend easily, and your posts are far from offending me. I think your views are as fucked up as mixing a good single malt with cherry coke.

Why did I drag in the article? Because in it there was a bloody rifle made for kids! And dragging in the swimming apparel is worse than Jack's argument about "if it's people that kills, why not allow bombs".

So do you mean that kids can use anything as long as they're supervised by an adult? Put them behind the wheel of a car and on the road, as long as mommy or daddy is there to prevent an accident?

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 6:26:26 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,082
Location: United States
elitfromnorth wrote:


Who said I got offended? I don't offend easily, and your posts are far from offending me. I think your views are as fucked up as mixing a good single malt with cherry coke.

Why did I drag in the article? Because in it there was a bloody rifle made for kids! And dragging in the swimming apparel is worse than Jack's argument about "if it's people that kills, why not allow bombs".

So do you mean that kids can use anything as long as they're supervised by an adult? Put them behind the wheel of a car and on the road, as long as mommy or daddy is there to prevent an accident?


I wouldn't do that with my kids, but if you want to do that with your kids, fuckit. They're your kids. As long as you're willing to take responsibility when things go tragically wrong, why the fuck should I care what happens to your kids? I think of it as evolution in action. Put another way, "Darwin wins again."

Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 6:42:41 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,579
Location: California
MrNudiePants wrote:


I wouldn't do that with my kids, but if you want to do that with your kids, fuckit. They're your kids. As long as you're willing to take responsibility when things go tragically wrong, why the fuck should I care what happens to your kids? I think of it as evolution in action. Put another way, "Darwin wins again."


What a fucking asshole...

You think gun victims should win a darwin award? This makes me think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about darwin's theory of survival of the fittest... Holy shit. This is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read. I hope you have your drool cup fastened properly as to not get any your shirt. Sorry, chest.



Highwayman
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 7:08:45 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/10/2012
Posts: 1,498


It is amusing and sickening at the same time that "gun enthusiasts" continually point a finger and demonstratively state that "I am responsible." It is a cowardice move to always point to the other person, and say that the real problem is something other than the continuous proliferation of arms that is unnecessary.

Just watched Mrs. Lafferty, who is sitting to the left of the gentleman in this video. She has more moxy and makes more sense than any calculated, prescribed antidote to the usual pro-gun conundrum.

Have fun with your guns, and stick 'em up your asses/arses.

bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake




‎"The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible." --Wilde
Buz
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 7:24:06 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,195
Location: Atlanta, United States
The responsibility solely rests with the parents. I am sure they will be prosecuted. There are enough redundant laws on the books to easily prosecute them.

I don't agree with marketing guns such as that to children. It easily looks like a toy. Unfortunately, there is a market for everything. Many times making it illegal enables it to thrive even more. However, any state can pass legislation that bars specifically marketing guns to children.

I myself would never purchase a gun that easily looks like a toy, but I will teach gun safety and responsible use to my children, should I have any, once they become old enough.

Parents who do not secure their weapons from their children are already subject to felony prosecution in all 50 states.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

Marshall_Lewis
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 7:47:56 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/16/2012
Posts: 272
Location: Alum Creek, United States
When I was 5 I had my own gun. A 20 gauge single-shot shotgun, a lot of kids in the small town we lived in learned shooting at that age. We learned what guns are and what they are capable of, how to properly handle one, and to respect them. We would go to the range on Saturdays, I learned to always keep unloaded when not being used, never to point it at a person regardless of a situation, if it called for that type of action, our parents would take care of it. We never had these types of accidents in these situations, our town hasn't had a person shot, since its inception. When we got home, we cleaned the guns, and locked them up. We were not to touch them, if we were not at the range, or in the woods. Yes, if they are targeting kids, yes it would get under my skin, just like I was when they introduced the flavored chewing tobacco and cigarettes, we as parents cracked down on it and they stopped making them. The thing about guns that are attracting kids, they are also attracting females. So do we really know, if the target group is kids, or females. Of course it you ask them they will lie about it. There comes the responsibility of the parents that buy the guns for kids, to teach them to handle properly, with care, and respect. The guns should be locked up when not in use, and in a way a kid wont be able to obtain it. That is parent responsibility, to take the measures to prevent a kids curiosity from getting the better of them and putting them in a unnecessary risking of life.
Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 7:53:04 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,579
Location: California
Master_Yoda wrote:
When I was 5 I had my own gun. A 20 gauge single-shot shotgun, a lot of kids in the small town we lived in learned shooting at that age. We learned what guns are and what they are capable of, how to properly handle one, and to respect them. We would go to the range on Saturdays, I learned to always keep unloaded when not being used, never to point it at a person regardless of a situation, if it called for that type of action, our parents would take care of it. We never had these types of accidents in these situations, our town hasn't had a person shot, since its inception. When we got home, we cleaned the guns, and locked them up. We were not to touch them, if we were not at the range, or in the woods. Yes, if they are targeting kids, yes it would get under my skin, just like I was when they introduced the flavored chewing tobacco and cigarettes, we as parents cracked down on it and they stopped making them. The thing about guns that are attracting kids, they are also attracting females. So do we really know, if the target group is kids, or females. Of course it you ask them they will lie about it. There comes the responsibility of the parents that buy the guns for kids, to teach them to handle properly, with care, and respect. The guns should be locked up when not in use, and in a way a kid wont be able to obtain it. That is parent responsibility, to take the measures to prevent a kids curiosity from getting the better of them and putting them in a unnecessary risking of life.


So because they are pink they are attracting women? laughing8





Marshall_Lewis
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 7:56:01 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/16/2012
Posts: 272
Location: Alum Creek, United States
Quote:
So because they are pink they are attracting women?



Yes. A lot of women where I am around, love the fact they can have a pink gun. I don't know why, but hey, everybody has the right to like what they want. lol
elitfromnorth
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 7:56:39 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,589
Location: Burrowed, Norway
Master_Yoda wrote:
The thing about guns that are attracting kids, they are also attracting females. So do we really know, if the target group is kids, or females. Of course it you ask them they will lie about it.


If you look at the size of the rifles here and also the pictures(that are more than plentyful) then you'll see that they are not pink ones made to look girly for the ladies, but size and colour are perfect for kids. They even call that part of their website "Kids Corner".

http://www.crickett.com/crickett_kidscorner.php

Do you really think that kids in general are mature enough to wield a bloody rifle? To me responsibility about guns is all about maturity, and when was the last time you saw a mature 5 year old?

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:05:07 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,579
Location: California
Master_Yoda wrote:



Yes. A lot of women where I am around, love the fact they can have a pink gun. I don't know why, but hey, everybody has the right to like what they want. lol


All the women gun owners I know would think wielding a pink rifle meant for girls was fucking stupid.

It doesn't surprise me that the target market for this is sexist in that if girls need a gun, it must be pink. Look at the pictures.. All the boys have wood stocks and the girls have pink ones. What an embarrassment.



Marshall_Lewis
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:12:51 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/16/2012
Posts: 272
Location: Alum Creek, United States
Quote:
If you look at the size of the rifles here and also the pictures(that are more than plentyful) then you'll see that they are not pink ones made to look girly for the ladies, but size and colour are perfect for kids. They even call that part of their website "Kids Corner".


Quote:
Do you really think that kids in general are mature enough to wield a bloody rifle? To me responsibility about guns is all about maturity, and when was the last time you saw a mature 5 year old?


22. caliber weapons are very small, and almost perfect for a kid of that age group to learn. There is hardly any kick, there just a step above a air powered pellet or BB gun. I see what your saying about maturity. That is on the parents to decide. My parents thought I was, and I haven't let them down yet, along with the guys I grew up with. I have no problem if a adult is with them, but to give a loaded weapon to a kid and turn around or walk away is appalling, and very drastic measures must be taken. The Division of Wildlife, catches a kid, on a range or even in a back yard, with a weapon, and no parental supervision, the parents are fined heavily, with jail time, all there weapons are seized, and the case is passed on to Children Services, were most likely the kids are going to a foster home.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:16:26 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,082
Location: United States
Highwayman wrote:


It is amusing and sickening at the same time that "gun enthusiasts" continually point a finger and demonstratively state that "I am responsible." It is a cowardice move to always point to the other person, and say that the real problem is something other than the continuous proliferation of arms that is unnecessary.

Just watched Mrs. Lafferty, who is sitting to the left of the gentleman in this video. She has more moxy and makes more sense than any calculated, prescribed antidote to the usual pro-gun conundrum.

Have fun with your guns, and stick 'em up your asses/arses.

bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake bootyshake




No, the "real problem" is that nobody wants to hold the person at fault responsible. Tens of millions of kids have been raised up around firearms, and learned to be responsible, careful, and aware of the dangers they present. One set of irresponsible parents makes the news because they were dumb shits and people like you want to hold all gun owners responsible, instead of the criminally irresponsible parents. That's just not logical.

If I ever do something irresponsible with a firearm I expect to be held liable to the full extent of the law. That's a far cry from "cowardice". It's adulthood. Taking responsibility for your actions, and the actions of those you're responsible for.

And why is it that people who decry violence and abhor guns always want to promote violence towards those of an opposing viewpoint? That's hypocrisy, pure and simple.

Marshall_Lewis
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:21:24 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/16/2012
Posts: 272
Location: Alum Creek, United States
Quote:
It doesn't surprise me that the target market for this is sexist in that if girls need a gun, it must be pink. Look at the pictures.. All the boys have wood stocks and the girls have pink ones. What an embarrassment.


It doesn't surprise me either, I have two purposes for my guns.

1.) Hunting, providing myself with food, I have Native American in my blood, I use every part of the animal. The reason I hunt is I live way out of the way of any city, 30 miles to the nearest. During the winter, if a heavy snow comes, I have no way to get to the store, and my family has to eat somehow.

2.) Home defense, reference my first reason, if I have my house invaded, it will be 30-45 mins before any type of law enforcement arrive. Most of the time though, my dog does the trick.

It doesn't matter to me or my fiancée that a gun is a certain color. We use it to provide, and protect.
Ruthie
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:46:51 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,189
Location: United States
The real story here is that there are people in this country who believe that it's perfectly okay to give five year old children guns as gifts. Now these parents have a five year old son who killed his two year old sister. He wouldn't have killed her if he didn't have a gun either. I don't think he would have picked up a knife and gone after her or beaten her to death with a brick. It's hard to do either of those things accidentally. Guns in the hands of children are accidents waiting to happen. It doesn't matter what color the gun is.

According to the news report, the boy received the gun last year as a gift. He would have been four then. There is no reason to arm four year old kids. There is no reason for them to learn gun safety at that age, or to know how to properly handle a gun. They shouldn't have guns.

I didn't kill anyone with a gun as a five year old, and do you know why? Because I didn't have a fucking gun. There were no guns around that I could get my hands on, much less a pretty pink one made just for my little hands. This little girl died because her parents were the kind of people who are online now defending guns, and they weren't hypocritical about their views. They let their kids play with guns right there at home.
Jinxy
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:50:14 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/10/2012
Posts: 2,826
Location: †Jinxy Approved†, United States
CoopsRuthie wrote:
The real story here is that there are people in this country who believe that it's perfectly okay to give five year old children guns as gifts. Now these parents have a five year old son who killed his two year old sister. He wouldn't have killed her if he didn't have a gun either. I don't think he would have picked up a knife and gone after her or beaten her to death with a brick. It's hard to do either of those things accidentally. Guns in the hands of children are accidents waiting to happen. It doesn't matter what color the gun is.

According to the news report, the boy received the gun last year as a gift. He would have been four then. There is no reason to arm four year old kids. There is no reason for them to learn gun safety at that age, or to know how to properly handle a gun. They shouldn't have guns.

I didn't kill anyone with a gun as a five year old, and do you know why? Because I didn't have a fucking gun. There were no guns around that I could get my hands on, much less a pretty pink one made just for my little hands. This little girl died because her parents were the kind of people who are online now defending guns, and they weren't hypocritical about their views. They let their kids play with guns right there at home.


Though I agree with everything you said in your whole post, the bold parts I agree with the most. It's sad that people think that kids need to learn to shoot, or even know about guns really at such a young age. Some things should just be held out until you're older.

†Jinxy Approved†

Highwayman
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:54:58 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/10/2012
Posts: 1,498
Some people may actually enjoy enjoy a gun up their ass. It's not violent, it's like a thumb up your ass. Maybe that's the true attraction.

‎"The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible." --Wilde
stickmancqb
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 9:02:57 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 3/6/2012
Posts: 91
Location: Texas, United States
I will not give up my right to own firearms because .02% of Americans are harmed or killed by a firearm. First you want semi auto death machines and now you want a child's 22lr bolt action. There is no pleasing yall is there?

It is not up to you or the government to decide on how and with what tools I choose to defend myself, my family, and my friends. If you do feel that it is your right to tell me how, then I say you are infringing upon my right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Each are equal crimes according to the laws of the land.

And for the people who are not in America and telling us how we need to change, go fix your own fucked up country and stay out of mine. I don't dictate how you live yours, so stay the hell out of mine.
Highwayman
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 9:39:11 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/10/2012
Posts: 1,498
Your way and others is affecting mine and others, hence the call for something new. Apparently, there's no pleasing yall until we're all armed to the teeth, and fixed on violent armed revolution or as an answer to some paranoid, soon come, governmental overthrow.

Guess what kiddies, the government don't need to disarm you, to control you.



‎"The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible." --Wilde
Dani
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 9:52:08 PM

Rank: Penguin Wrangler

Joined: 12/25/2010
Posts: 4,077
Location: Under Your Bed, United States
stickmancqb wrote:
I will not give up my right to own firearms because .02% of Americans are harmed or killed by a firearm. First you want semi auto death machines and now you want a child's 22lr bolt action. There is no pleasing yall is there?

It is not up to you or the government to decide on how and with what tools I choose to defend myself, my family, and my friends. If you do feel that it is your right to tell me how, then I say you are infringing upon my right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Each are equal crimes according to the laws of the land.

And for the people who are not in America and telling us how we need to change, go fix your own fucked up country and stay out of mine. I don't dictate how you live yours, so stay the hell out of mine.


Oh please. As far as countries go, America is pretty fucked up. And I say this as an American. I love it here. And my freedoms and such, but we're far from perfect. So throwing stones at countries who have SUCCESSFULLY managed to hunker down on gun control is self-defeating and just plain ignorant. As an American, I have an issue with guns designed for children who are still on the brink of learning to properly wipe their own asses. I have a problem with a gun being aesthetically designed for a 5 year old and that said 5 year old can pick up said gun and kill a 2 year old. It's an issue that needs to be addressed. Grasping at straws just to save face isn't the way to go. What the hell is a 5 year old defending himself from? What does it say about you as an adult or a parent where the best way you can 'defend' your child is by arming him/her? Is that your idea of life, liberty, and happiness? Because last I checked, these "fucked up" countries chiming in don't have armed 5 year olds killing their 2 year old siblings.



We're tiny. We're toony. We're all a little looney. And in this cartoony, we're invading your TV.

MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 10:04:27 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,082
Location: United States
CoopsRuthie wrote:
This little girl died because her parents were the kind of people who are online now defending guns, and they weren't hypocritical about their views. They let their kids play with guns right there at home.


No, the little died because her parents were irresponsible assholes. Their inattention to their children should earn them a long stay in prison and forced sterilization.


Here's why their daughter was killed:

CoopsRuthie wrote:
They let their kids play with guns right there at home.



In your own words. No responsible gun owner would EVER advocate that.

MrNudiePants
Posted: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 10:08:43 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,082
Location: United States
Highwayman wrote:
Some people may actually enjoy enjoy a gun up their ass. It's not violent, it's like a thumb up your ass. Maybe that's the true attraction.


And you know this from first-hand experience? Your earlier post was hypocritical and so is this one. People like you, who wish violence upon people with opposing points of view, make gun owners wary of "reasonable restrictions", and rightfully so.

LadyX
Posted: Thursday, May 02, 2013 2:28:33 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,681
Location: United States
stickmancqb wrote:
First you want semi auto death machines and now you want a child's 22lr bolt action. There is no pleasing yall is there?


Lfunny

But no, I get what you're saying. It's just beyond the pale to criticize the parents of a four or five year old boy having not only access but ownership to a deadly weapon. I couldn't agree with you more. You gotta watch these libs, Tailgunner Joe.

Your humor is very dry, but hilarious- I almost thought you were serious! confused5

First they came for my assault-style death machines, and I didn't say anything, for I didn't own any death machines of my own. Then they came for my toddler's loaded shotgun....

I'm shuddering at this crazy control grab! Oh where have our liberties gone? LOL
CleverFox
Posted: Thursday, May 02, 2013 2:55:37 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 465
Location: United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


I wouldn't do that with my kids, but if you want to do that with your kids, fuckit. They're your kids. As long as you're willing to take responsibility when things go tragically wrong, why the fuck should I care what happens to your kids? I think of it as evolution in action. Put another way, "Darwin wins again."


Really? So you think that 2 year old girl being shot by her 5 year old brother was Darwin in action? I never really agreed with you on this issue, Mrnudiepants, but I had no idea what a selfish, soulless and unfeeling being you are until you posted that comment.

Personally, I think the fact that you being you is your own personal purgatory.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.