Non Footy Chat Thread II

[Poupou Escobar]

Which words in particular? I can’t self-censor if you won’t show me what’s forbidden to say.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

After this incident I think it's obvious that the problem in the US is Atheist SJWs, right? I mean, just look at the guy's Facebook and LinkedIn profiles and you can see what drove him to act as he did.

 

[strider]

Sonny Jim Williams?

 

[Gary Gutful]

The problem is amphibians.

People who look like Bullfrogs should not be given guns.

 

[Gronk]

After this incident I think it's obvious that the problem in the US is Atheist SJWs, right? I mean, just look at the guy's Facebook and LinkedIn profiles and you can see what drove him to act as he did.

Dig deeper and you will find antifa and pizzas.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Apparently he was confronted by some other merkin with a gun and ran.

If you’re willing to gun down a congregation you’re probably willing to procure an illegal firearm, so gun laws wouldn’t change much.

Do you think the same logic applies for every mass shooting in the US? (i.e. It would have happened even if gun laws were much stronger).

 

[strider]

The point being, every muthaf**ker needs to walk around with their guns out as it scares off other muthaf**kers with their guns out .... ffs catch up

 

[Bazal]

The point being, every muthaf**ker needs to walk around with their guns out as it scares off other muthaf**kers with their guns out .... ffs catch up

That's why I wear singlets...

 

[Gronk]

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Do you think the same logic applies for every mass shooting in the US? (i.e. It would have happened even if gun laws were much stronger).

It would’ve been less likely to happen if there were fewer guns (it's far too late for there to be no guns or even not many guns). But changing gun laws would mean far fewer guns in the hands of non-psychos, meaning the deterrent effect wouldn’t stop these monsters.

 

[Gronk]

It would’ve been less likely to happen if there were fewer guns (it's far too late for there to be no guns or even not many guns). But changing gun laws would mean far fewer guns in the hands of non-psychos, meaning the deterrent effect wouldn’t stop these monsters.

"There is nothing you could do to stop what happened at <insert location of spree shooting>" is such a massive soft cock cop out. "He would have got a gun illegally then anyway" is another lame arse pussy response.



FEB 28 2017, 8:39 PM ET
Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses

President Donald Trump quietly signed a bill into law Tuesday rolling back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun.

The rule, which was finalized in December, added people receiving Social Security checks for mental illnesses and people deemed unfit to handle their own financial affairs to the national background check database.

Had the rule fully taken effect, the Obama administration predicted it would have added about 75,000 names to that database.

President Barack Obama recommended the now-nullified regulation in a 2013 memo following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which left 20 first graders and six others dead. The measure sought to block some people with severe mental health problems from buying guns.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...ng-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221

 

[hindy111]

The problem is amphibians.

People who look like Bullfrogs should not be given guns.

I shouldn't laugh at this. But I did.
We are both going to hell Gary. Pit a good word in for me you bastard.

 

[hindy111]

It would’ve been less likely to happen if there were fewer guns (it's far too late for there to be no guns or even not many guns). But changing gun laws would mean far fewer guns in the hands of non-psychos, meaning the deterrent effect wouldn’t stop these monsters.

You take back the guns. And anyone caught with one is heavily penalised.
Also stop sale of bullets.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

"There is nothing you could do to stop what happened at <insert location of spree shooting>" is such a massive soft c**k cop out. "He would have got a gun illegally then anyway" is another lame arse pussy response.

Nobody said there’s nothing you can do. More armed citizens would have stopped him real quick. Either that or armed cops at any gathering of people. But who’s gong to pay for that?

As for discriminating against the mentally ill, why should they lose the right to self defence? This was an anti-Christian hate crime.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You take back the guns. And anyone caught with one is heavily penalised.
Also stop sale of bullets.

Who’s going to give them back when there’s people shooting up churches? Guns are enshrined in the US Constitution. Any authority who tries to legislate their removal becomes illegitimate.

 

[Gronk]

Nobody said there’s nothing you can do. More armed citizens would have stopped him real quick. Either that or armed cops at any gathering of people. But who’s gong to pay for that?

As for discriminating against the mentally ill, why should they lose the right to self defence? This was an anti-Christian hate crime.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Usually so eloquent Gronk. It’s as if there’s a simple solution for everything that involves zero loss to yourself.

 

[Gary Gutful]

It would’ve been less likely to happen if there were fewer guns (it's far too late for there to be no guns or even not many guns). But changing gun laws would mean far fewer guns in the hands of non-psychos, meaning the deterrent effect wouldn’t stop these monsters.

You are assuming the non-psychos won't abuse their power and start using their guns for bad rather than good. Who polices the people with guns that are policing the psychos? More people with guns? Where does it end? With us all carrying around 3 guns? Arming dogs?

I don't trust anyone and I'm surprised you do. People are f**ken merkins. Get yourself out of the position of someone who needs a gun to feel safe and think about the issue more broadly. Surely less guns will result in less deaths overall. Do you actually disagree with this?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You are assuming the non-psychos won't abuse their power and start using their guns for bad rather than good. Who polices the people with guns that are policing the psychos? More people with guns? Where does it end? With us all carrying around 3 guns? Arming dogs?

I don't trust anyone and I'm surprised you do. People are f**ken merkins. Get yourself out of the position of someone who needs a gun to feel safe and think about the issue more broadly. Surely less guns will result in less deaths overall. Do you actually disagree with this?

No I agree. But you need to stop thinking macro if you want to understand why people are resistant to this. For that one merkin who is threatened by a criminal with a gun and doesn’t have one of his own, he doesn’t give a f**k at that moment if the whole world is safer. You wouldn’t either.

 

[Happy MEel]

No I agree. But you need to stop thinking macro if you want to understand why people are resistant to this. For that one merkin who is threatened by a criminal with a gun and doesn’t have one of his own, he doesn’t give a f**k at that moment if the whole world is safer. You wouldn’t either.

That’s why we have a political leaders...to think macro for us.