Liberals Bring Rocks To A Gun Fight

[Spurtacular]

:lmao You can't make this sh** up!

http://wnep.com/2018/03/22/superintendent-says-students-are-armed-with-rocks-in-case-of-a-school-shooting/

[Pavlov]

Eh, they already have someone with a gun on campus.

Did you want the students to have guns?

[Spurtacular]

Eh, they already have someone with a gun on campus.

Did you want the students to have guns?

Is there a reason you're exempting the teachers and other staff?

[Pavlov]

Is there a reason you're exempting the teachers and other staff?Your headline is Superintendent Says Students Are Armed with Rocks In Case of a School Shooting.

You didn't answer the question: Did you want the students to have guns?

[dabom]

Eh, they already have someone with a gun on campus.

Did you want the students to have guns?

I actually like the idea. I mean we already have guards with guns right?

[Pavlov]

I actually like the idea. I mean we already have guards with guns right?:lol Moar!

[Spurtacular]

Your headline is Superintendent Says Students Are Armed with Rocks In Case of a School Shooting.

You didn't answer the question: Did you want the students to have guns?

Yup, they are arming students with rocks instead of teachers and staff with guns. Congrats on the recap, Captain Dickhead. And :lol at the coloring on top of that.

[Chris]

School of Rock?


ObpcGNCU944

[Pavlov]

Yup, they are arming students with rocks instead of teachers and staff with guns. Congrats on the recap, Captain Dickhead. And :lol at the coloring on top of that.You didn't answer the question: Did you want the students to have guns?

[spurraider21]

School of Rock?


ObpcGNCU944
:rollin tbh

[SnakeBoy]

Canned goods would be better. They can be thrown at the shooter very hard and they can be given to the poor kids before they expire. Plus people love to donate them so they would be free for the schools.

[Spurtacular]

You didn't answer the question: Did you want the students to have guns?

Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities. :lmao

[koriwhat]

how are they going to fend off tactical swat experts with rocks?

[Spurtacular]

how are they going to fend off tactical swat experts with rocks?

Sitting duck strategy has only failed a million times over; liberals gonna stick with that.

[pgardn]

how are they going to fend off tactical swat experts with rocks?

How are they going to fend them off with guns while they are shooting each other?

[koriwhat]

Sitting duck strategy has only failed a million times over; liberals gonna stick with that.

for sure.


How are they going to fend them off with guns while they are shooting each other?

well, no one expects the children/teens to carry guns silly. that's exactly what everyone doesn't want.

[pgardn]

for sure.



well, no one expects the children/teens to carry guns silly. that's exactly what everyone doesn't want.

So food cans and rocks...

What about ramen. Really cold solid ramen, and fling it.

[pgardn]

how are they going to fend off tactical swat experts with rocks?

So you were suggesting running... to fend then off? Rocks are good enough for Palestinians.

[koriwhat]

So food cans and rocks...

What about ramen. Really cold solid ramen, and fling it.


So you were suggesting running... to fend then off? Rocks are good enough for Palestinians.

you're heading in the wrong direction altogether... turn the hell around!

[koriwhat]

So you were suggesting running... to fend then off? Rocks are good enough for Palestinians.

actually i believe we should just beam david hogg to any school shooting and let him talk the shooter down with his cnn talking points or he can hide in another closet and do another fake interview on the scene.

[ElNono]

This story reminds me of bubba thinking his AR15 is going to fend off the US Military drones...

[pgardn]

you're heading in the wrong direction altogether... turn the hell around!

Massive barrage of textbooks?

[pgardn]

This story reminds me of bubba thinking his AR15 is going to fend off the US Military drones...

Just thinking they are going to have to fend off the US military...


If things really get that bad bubbas will be shooting each other while the military smokes cigars.

[Isitjustme?]

This is hilarious. Its funny because people high school kids should be encouraged to bring guns to class of course. Im making the logic arguments

[Nathan89]

This is good trolling material that I could easily join in but I don't think it's a worst idea at least in theory(theory with imagination). That is someone with a gun is absolutely bombarded with rocks. In practice all the rocks are buried in their backpacks and impossible to get to. In practice everyone is going to be shitting their pants and wouldn't dare throw a rock. If they did they would likely be the only one and be served up on a platter. So overall it's very unlikely to workout. I still applaud the outside the box thinking.

The poor little dude that tries be a hero with rock though. :lol

[pgardn]

This is hilarious. Its funny because people high school kids should be encouraged to bring guns to class of course. Im making the logic arguments

So kids that simmer and stew overnight about conflicts kill other students 1st class of the day. But then thoughts concerning retribution build up enough so last class of the day also has a high mortality rate.

[Nathan89]

This story reminds me of bubba thinking his AR15 is going to fend off the US Military drones...

So this reminds you of the strawman you've constructed. :lol

[Pavlov]

Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities. :lmaoYou didn't answer the question: Did you want the students to have guns?

[Spurtacular]

You didn't answer the question: Did you want the students to have guns?

Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities. :lmao

[Pavlov]

Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities. :lmaoThe glaring reality is you're terrified to answer simple questions.:lmao

[Spurtacular]

The glaring reality is you're terrified to answer simple questions.:lmao

Right off the bat, you've tried to detract from the fact that it's rocks vs. bullets. Ignoring the glaring crux of the matter; par.

[Pavlov]

Right off the bat, you've tried to detract from the fact that it's rocks vs. bullets. Ignoring the glaring crux of the matter; par.Did you want the students to have guns?

[Spurtacular]

Did you want the students to have guns?


Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities. :lmao


Right off the bat, you've tried to detract from the fact that it's rocks vs. bullets. Ignoring the glaring crux of the matter; par.

[Pavlov]

You still didn't answer the question. :lmao

[Spurtacular]

You still didn't answer the question. :cry


Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities. :lmao


Right off the bat, you've tried to detract from the fact that it's rocks vs. bullets. Ignoring the glaring crux of the matter; par.

[Pavlov]

:lol now you're changing quotes again.

[Spurtacular]

:cry now you're changing quotes again.

:lol More desperation. Protesting immaterial matters.

[Pavlov]

:lol More desperation. Protesting immaterial matters.:lmao Now you're declaring victory again.

[Spurtacular]

Now you're declaring victory again.

Rocks vs. guns. This "victory" was there from the start. I'm just pointing out your typical loser tactics. :lol

[Pavlov]

Rocks vs. guns. This "victory" was there from the start. I'm just pointing out your typical loser tactics. :lol:lmao Declaring victory after running away from a simple yes or no question.

[Spurtacular]

:cry Declaring victory after running away from a simple yes or no question.

Cheap come-ons. Par.

Guns vs. rocks, bro. Did you dream of growing up being a loser and advocate bringing rocks to a gun fight? :lmao

[Pavlov]

Cheap come-ons. Par.

Guns vs. rocks, bro. Did you dream of growing up being a loser and advocate bringing rocks to a gun fight? :lmaoYou're still running away. Par. Did you dream of growing up being a loser and running away from simple yes or no questions on an anonymous message board? :lmao

[Spurtacular]

You're still running away. Par. Did you dream of growing up being a loser and running away from simple yes or no questions on an anonymous message board? :lmao

Seriously; did you dream of being a loser and being on the side of bringing rocks to a gun fight? Would the twenty-year-old version of you want to kick your ass, or have you always been that big of a loser?

[Pavlov]

Seriously; did you dream of being a loser and being on the side of bringing rocks to a gun fight? Would the twenty-year-old version of you want to kick your ass, or have you always been that big of a loser?:lol unhinged

[Spurtacular]

:lol unhinged

:lol As indicated by my calm response.

So, the twenty-year-old version of you would have advocated for bringing rocks to a gun fight? You always been that big a loser? I can see why you'd want to "run" from this question.

[Pavlov]

:lol As indicated by my calm response.

So, the twenty-year-old version of you would have advocated for bringing rocks to a gun fight? You always been that big a loser? I can see why you'd want to "run" from this question.This is supposed to be calm?

:lmao

You keep on being obsessed with me after running from a simple yes or no question about the topic you started. It's a good look on you, tough guy. :lol

[Chris]

Pavlov hates guns, but he owns one and keeps it in a safe in his second home.

[Pavlov]

Pavlov hates guns, but he owns one and keeps it in a safe in his second home.I never said I hated guns.

:lol white Chris' biographical skills are lacking.

[SnakeBoy]

So food cans and rocks...

What about ramen. Really cold solid ramen, and fling it.

Or overcooked ramen. It's sticky and be thrown at the shooters face to blind him. Or better yet every kid gets a can of silly string...

http://i2.wp.com/www.dangerdolan.tv/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/covered-in-silly-string.jpg

once the shooter is covered in silly string the children could scurry to safety.

Plus teachers could then be trained on how to takedown a silly string covered shooter and restrain them until police arrive. Of course that would be voluntary training, perhaps a small bonus for teachers that can show proficiency at taking down the shooter without themselves becoming entangled in the silly string.

[ElNono]

So this reminds you of the strawman you've constructed. :lol

:lol how so?

I'm actually one of the few here that supports the 2nd amendment as means of personal protection (including guns), but one of the worst arguments made here plenty of times is that confiscation starts the wheels of an authoritarian government, and that somehow having an armed population can fight back against such entity... obviously, obviating that such government would necessarily need the support of the military to succeed. Which makes it an absolutely retarded argument. There's way more convincing arguments for the 2nd Amendment, that ain't one.

[rmt]

Beyond stupid. These people are in charge of our kids? That's more frightening than that dumb idea.

[pgardn]

Beyond stupid. These people are in charge of our kids? That's more frightening than that dumb idea.

Find a superintendent in any small school district in Texas and you are gonna get a volunteer basically. It's homeschooling with buildings. It could be good, or very bad. Even in a large district with a school board of lunatics who hire a fool. If It's all about keeping it local, this is what you get. Who are the locals...

[pgardn]

Or overcooked ramen. It's sticky and be thrown at the shooters face to blind him. Or better yet every kid gets a can of silly string...

http://i2.wp.com/www.dangerdolan.tv/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/covered-in-silly-string.jpg

once the shooter is covered in silly string the children could scurry to safety.

Plus teachers could then be trained on how to takedown a silly string covered shooter and restrain them until police arrive. Of course that would be voluntary training, perhaps a small bonus for teachers that can show proficiency at taking down the shooter without themselves becoming entangled in the silly string.

Damn that looks like fun. The only silly string I have ever used loses pressure (effective range) and plastic (string, the projectile) rapidly. We need to ramp it up. I see multiple canisters on any easy to carry mechanism that can be refitted for a high constant pressure. Not as effective as tissue piercing shrapnel, but fun.

[Chris]

977460222657736709

[CosmicCowboy]

Damn that looks like fun. The only silly string I have ever used loses pressure (effective range) and plastic (string, the projectile) rapidly. We need to ramp it up. I see multiple canisters on any easy to carry mechanism that can be refitted for a high constant pressure. Not as effective as tissue piercing shrapnel, but fun.

Awesome idea! High capacity assault string!!!!

[koriwhat]

Massive barrage of textbooks?

you've jumped off a cliff now... wtf pg? lol

then again that might be the best case scenario considering those books don't teach those kids jack shit except make believe stories of the past & fake science.

[koriwhat]

977460222657736709

lol hearding the sheep into jihad even faster... stoning you say?

[koriwhat]

Seriously; did you dream of being a loser and being on the side of bringing rocks to a gun fight? Would the twenty-year-old version of you want to kick your ass, or have you always been that big of a loser?

hahahaha

[TeyshaBlue]

School of Rock?


ObpcGNCU944

*Rimshot*

[pgardn]

Awesome idea! High capacity assault string!!!!

Business idea.

I know this same thing can be done with cornstarch. And this means we could use water as a solvent possibly. Pressurized cornstarch silly string that is biodegradable or you can even eat it! The silly string now on the market is some sort of plastic and has some sort of hydrocarbon solvent to mix with the plastic before you blow air into it and send it out in a string. I can smell it. Sorta nasty. But the plastic polymerizes really nicely.... I don't know how well the cornstarch would polymerize. I know it would, but possibly not in a nice narrow string. It might just create some sort of cornstarch "snow" We gotta do some tests.

Someone must've tried this... But ya never know.

I can see getting sprayed with cornstarch string until you are all cocooned up, eat through it, and emerge as a beautiful butterfly ( or snowflake).

[pgardn]

you've jumped off a cliff now... wtf pg? lol

then again that might be the best case scenario considering those books don't teach those kids jack shit except make believe stories of the past & fake science.

Well then I should be dead, yet I still come up with what seems to me, to be fantastic ideas. I know you feel that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So there ya have it... I think you know the feeling, you have to. Some of the topics argued have clearly illustrated the comical, incredibly silly analogies and equivalents.

[koriwhat]

Well then I should be dead, yet I still come up with what seems to me, to be fantastic ideas. I know you feel that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So there ya have it... I think you know the feeling, you have to. Some of the topics argued have clearly illustrated the comical, incredibly silly analogies and equivalents.

:tu

[pgardn]

Business idea.

I know this same thing can be done with cornstarch. And this means we could use water as a solvent possibly. Pressurized cornstarch silly string that is biodegradable or you can even eat it! The silly string now on the market is some sort of plastic and has some sort of hydrocarbon solvent to mix with the plastic before you blow air into it and send it out in a string. I can smell it. Sorta nasty. But the plastic polymerizes really nicely.... I don't know how well the cornstarch would polymerize. I know it would, but possibly not in a nice narrow string. It might just create some sort of cornstarch "snow" We gotta do some tests.

Someone must've tried this... But ya never know.

I can see getting sprayed with cornstarch string until you are all cocooned up, eat through it, and emerge as a beautiful butterfly ( or snowflake).

Bumpage so this does not escape a CC viewing.

[CosmicCowboy]

Bumpage so this does not escape a CC viewing.

Lol

Need to genetically engineer some Shelob spiders for the string material.

[koriwhat]

Bumpage so this does not escape a CC viewing.

corn starch? from my experience it clumps too much for me to fathom it as a thickener for silly string. who knows though? would be a fun experiment. you can never go wrong with more silly string especially that which can shoot high pressure and 20 ft+.

[pgardn]

corn starch? from my experience it clumps too much for me to fathom it as a thickener for silly string. who knows though? would be a fun experiment. you can never go wrong with more silly string especially that which can shoot high pressure and 20 ft+.

If you blow air into and force it out under high pressure... maybe heat it up before and use some of the more soluble cornstarch. The stuff in grocery stores is not very soluble. But I get your concern with the thickening. Gotta play.

[pgardn]

Lol

Need to genetically engineer some Shelob spiders for the string material.

Thats protein and we are gonna get really hung up. This would be our go to for stopping thieves and such. Uhh mm... Sounds familiar. I think we have some copyright problems in merely writing about this...

[CosmicCowboy]

Thats protein and we are gonna get really hung up. This would be our go to for stopping thieves and such. Uhh mm... Sounds familiar. I think we have some copyright problems in merely writing about this...

:lmao

[Expert]

:lol Moar!

So you think school shootings are funny?

Hopefully you never encounter a situation where you are forced to face the fact that you're defenseless. Hopefully your cell phone works. Hopefully someone responds in time.

[Expert]

Did you want the students to have guns?

Interesting double standard at work here.

Americans don't need guns because they cannot defeat a military with nukes

Students cannot defeat, with rocks, a shooter with an AR-15 but instead of accepting that, you present the false dilemma that the alternative suggestion is to give them guns.

Is the alternative suggestion for the 2nd Amendment that civilians should have nukes?

[Pavlov]

So you think school shootings are funny?

Hopefully you never encounter a situation where you are forced to face the fact that you're defenseless. Hopefully your cell phone works. Hopefully someone responds in time.


Interesting double standard at work here.

Americans don't need guns because they cannot defeat a military with nukes

Students cannot defeat, with rocks, a shooter with an AR-15 but instead of accepting that, you present the false dilemma that the alternative suggestion is to give them guns.

Is the alternative suggestion for the 2nd Amendment that civilians should have nukes?lol DMC

[Chris]

lol DMC

This is your white flag.

[Pavlov]

This is your white flag.It's his tbh.

[Expert]

The school security situation is a microcosm of society in general. There are cops on some school campuses, and there are cops in most neighborhoods. In neither case will the cop be able to prevent you from being killed by a gunman who is intent on killing you. We see this play out in a school and we think everyone needs to be armed. We see it play out in the public and we think everyone needs to be disarmed.

The fact in both instances is that as individuals, we have no power to disarm the entire population, so we are left with the choice of disarming ourselves. Some of us choose to have a way of fighting back. Some of you would take that away so that you feel safer. Do you think some of the students in those schools would feel safer if other students didn't have buckets of rocks?

You don't have to answer, it's a rhetorical question. The answer is quite obvious.

[Pavlov]

DMC never has an actual take on the topic.

[Spurtacular]

DMC never has an actual take on the topic.

Still beats kids should battle gunfighters with rocks by a mile. :lmao

[Pavlov]

Still beats kids should battle gunfighters with rocks by a mile. :lmaoYou don't have a take either. You just run away from direct questions about the topic you brought up. :lmao

[Spurtacular]

You don't have a take either. You just run away from direct questions about the topic you brought up. :lmao

I'm on the don't bring rocks to a gunfight side of the argument, skippy.

[Chris]

I'm on the don't bring rocks to a gunfight side of the argument, skippy.

:lol

[Pavlov]

I'm on the don't bring rocks to a gunfight side of the argument, skippy.Did you want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Did you want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

There are comprehensive solutions. My bar is not rocks vs. guns like yours. :lmao

[Pavlov]

There are comprehensive solutions. My bar is not rocks vs. guns like yours. :lmaoWhat is your comprehensive solution?

You want the kids to have nothing but clear backpacks to throw?

[Mikeanaro]

Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities. :lmao

[Expert]

DMC never has an actual take on the topic.

If you had a 10 year old child in a classroom and an active shooter was approaching the room, and you as a remote observer could only make a choice between two things, arm the child or don't arm the child, which would you choose?

Keep in mind you cannot intervene, just like IRL you won't be there. Does that mean we should arm kids? No. It does get to the heart of the matter though - the fact that when that moment comes it's just the kid facing down a firearm and anything and everything safety related goes straight to hell. So it would be nice if someone in the vicinity had the ability to intervene, wouldn't it?

There is no real "safe space", as we've been shown countless times. Hate to break it to you, snowflake.

For that reason, rocks are better than nothing, but the idea of the rocks isn't to defend themselves, but to give them confidence that they can (they cannot) and to send a message that they won't die without a fight (they will).

[Pavlov]

If you had a 10 year old child in a classroom and an active shooter was approaching the room, and you as a remote observer could only make a choice between two things, arm the child or don't arm the child, which would you choose?

Keep in mind you cannot intervene, just like IRL you won't be there. Does that mean we should arm kids? No. It does get to the heart of the matter though - the fact that when that moment comes it's just the kid facing down a firearm and anything and everything safety related goes straight to hell. So it would be nice if someone in the vicinity had the ability to intervene, wouldn't it?

There is no real "safe space", as we've been shown countless times. Hate to break it to you, snowflake.

For that reason, rocks are better than nothing, but the idea of the rocks isn't to defend themselves, but to give them confidence that they can (they cannot) and to send a message that they won't die without a fight (they will).:lol No wonder you never actually present a take. You're much better at trying to collect the personal information of other posters.

[Spurminator]

If you had a 10 year old child in a classroom and an active shooter was approaching the room, and you as a remote observer could only make a choice between two things, arm the child or don't arm the child, which would you choose?

Keep in mind you cannot intervene, just like IRL you won't be there. Does that mean we should arm kids? No. It does get to the heart of the matter though - the fact that when that moment comes it's just the kid facing down a firearm and anything and everything safety related goes straight to hell. So it would be nice if someone in the vicinity had the ability to intervene, wouldn't it?

There is no real "safe space", as we've been shown countless times. Hate to break it to you, snowflake.

For that reason, rocks are better than nothing, but the idea of the rocks isn't to defend themselves, but to give them confidence that they can (they cannot) and to send a message that they won't die without a fight (they will).

So in other words it's kind of a microcosm for grown men loading up on AR's to protect themselves against government intervention.

[pgardn]

So in other words it's kind of a microcosm for grown men loading up on AR's to protect themselves against government intervention.

Because the personal self defense thing is not working for some weapons.

What personal situation, for the no restriction inididuals in this country, has best illustrated the need for protection against our government's ability to take your country from you? Anecdotes are fine. Go.

[Spurminator]

Because the personal self defense thing is not working for some weapons.

What personal situation, for the no restriction inididuals in this country, has best illustrated the need for protection against our government's ability to take your country from you? Anecdotes are fine. Go.

*Woosh*

[pgardn]

*Woosh*

I want insight into phobias.
I want "there is a unit of marines under my bed" stuff.

And further, I may not want to be a part of their personal piece of Colorado if I have land in the new country staked out.

[Expert]

So in other words it's kind of a microcosm for grown men loading up on AR's to protect themselves against government intervention.

Grown men and women (and the rest of you).

You seem ok with one, not ok with the other. A knife vs a grizzly is a futile endeavor, but it beats bare hands vs the grizzly. Either way, the grizzly is coming.

[Expert]

:lol No wonder you never actually present a take. You're much better at trying to collect the personal information of other posters.

You're not qualified to debate me.

[Pavlov]

You're not qualified to debate me.You never debate anybody, chickenshit.

[Expert]

You never debate anybody, chickenshit.


You're not qualified to debate me.

[Pavlov]

You're too chickenshit to debate anyone, which is why you don't debate anyone.

[Spurminator]

Grown men and women (and the rest of you).

You seem ok with one, not ok with the other. A knife vs a grizzly is a futile endeavor, but it beats bare hands vs the grizzly. Either way, the grizzly is coming.

Actually, the grizzly probably isn't coming. Especially not in the way these GI Joe Militia clubs fantasize that it will.

If it came, how it would really come, they'd never even have a chance to shoot. Bare hands, knives, guns, it won't matter. In all likelihood, they'll be along for the ride in full support.

[Spurtacular]

You're too chickenshit to debate anyone, which is why you don't debate anyone.

You never debate either. Where's your stance on why kids having rocks is the best idea? You haven't listed it, "chickenshit".

[Expert]

Actually, the grizzly probably isn't coming. Especially not in the way these GI Joe Militia clubs fantasize that it will.

If it came, how it would really come, they'd never even have a chance to shoot. Bare hands, knives, guns, it won't matter. In all likelihood, they'll be along for the ride in full support.

Tell the kids in that Florida school that the shooter wasn't real. The grizzly doesn't need to be the federal government. Your strawman regarding fighting the government is just a fart in the wind.

If it "won't matter" why do you care if they try?

[Expert]

You're too chickenshit to debate anyone, which is why you don't debate anyone.

Chump's Dale Robinson impression ^

[sickdsm]

You're too chickenshit to debate anyone, which is why you don't debate anyone.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Insists on asking questions than refuses to directly answer others had been your go to move for years.......

[koriwhat]

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Insists on asking questions than refuses to directly answer others had been your go to move for years.......

:tu

[Spurminator]

Tell the kids in that Florida school that the shooter wasn't real. The grizzly doesn't need to be the federal government. Your strawman regarding fighting the government is just a fart in the wind.

The kids aren't the ones arming themselves with rocks (or guns.) And it's not a strawman, it's a common 2A argument.


If it "won't matter" why do you care if they try?

I do care that paranoid morons thinking they can save America from the liberals by stocking up weapons are driving demand for an archaic and dangerous industry and making those weapons cheap and easy to obtain on the secondary market.

[Spurtacular]

The kids aren't the ones arming themselves with rocks (or guns.) And it's not a strawman, it's a common 2A argument.



I do care that paranoid morons thinking they can save America from the liberals by stocking up weapons are driving demand for an archaic and dangerous industry and making those weapons cheap and easy to obtain on the secondary market.

:lol Crying about capitalism. Typical liberal.

[rmt]

The kids aren't the ones arming themselves with rocks (or guns.) And it's not a strawman, it's a common 2A argument.



I do care that paranoid morons thinking they can save America from the liberals by stocking up weapons are driving demand for an archaic and dangerous industry and making those weapons cheap and easy to obtain on the secondary market.

I am confused. If less and less companies are selling firearms and people are hoarding them, how does that make those weapons cheap and easy to obtain in any market?

[Spurminator]

If less and less companies are selling firearms and people are hoarding them, how does that make those weapons cheap and easy to obtain in any market?

I don't know if fewer companies are making them, but gun sales continue to increase year-over-year despite fewer people owning them.

I would prefer they were hoarded, generally, and I think cutting off the supply hose can help facilitate that. Hoarders are currently pulling from a supply that continues to be replenished.

[Chris]

Spurm talking out of his ass again :lol

[Pavlov]

You never debate either. Where's your stance on why kids having rocks is the best idea? You haven't listed it, "chickenshit".Straw man.

[Pavlov]

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Insists on asking questions than refuses to directly answer others had been your go to move for years.......Sorry, you never answered mine.

[Nathan89]

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Insists on asking questions than refuses to directly answer others had been your go to move for years.......

I don't come on here often but that's pretty much what I've seen from him.

[Pavlov]

I don't come on here often but that's pretty much what I've seen from him.

lol bomb show

[Spurtacular]

Straw man.

:lol Saying you haven't put forth an argument for the main debate is a straw man, according to you.
:lol That pretty much says it all (for every thread you ever post in).

[Expert]

The kids aren't the ones arming themselves with rocks (or guns.) And it's not a strawman, it's a common 2A argument.

Same for the 1st. It's about having the freedom to speak out against your own government. Do you think you can overwhelm them by speaking on a corner? If not, is the 1st Amendment obsolete?



I do care that paranoid morons thinking they can save America from the liberals by stocking up weapons are driving demand for an archaic and dangerous industry and making those weapons cheap and easy to obtain on the secondary market.
Why do you care?

[Expert]

I don't know if fewer companies are making them, but gun sales continue to increase year-over-year despite fewer people owning them.

I would prefer they were hoarded, generally, and I think cutting off the supply hose can help facilitate that. Hoarders are currently pulling from a supply that continues to be replenished.

I still don't get the entire gist of this complaint. Someone showed a poll that said 90% of respondents were in favor of gun restrictions/laws. Why don't those people simply get rid of their guns, then only 10% of the population would possibly be armed?

Someone explain this.

[pgardn]

I still don't get the entire gist of this complaint. Someone showed a poll that said 90% of respondents were in favor of gun restrictions/laws. Why don't those people simply get rid of their guns, then only 10% of the population would possibly be armed?

Someone explain this.

Nice math work there...

[Spurminator]

Same for the 1st. It's about having the freedom to speak out against your own government. Do you think you can overwhelm them by speaking on a corner? If not, is the 1st Amendment obsolete?

The scenario where one feels compelled to speak out against the government is far more common than the scenario where someone needs to fight government intervention with a gun. It's about being able to freely criticize. Plus, ideas are more powerful against tyranny than an AR.

So, no, the 1A is not obsolete. And I don't recall saying the 2A was obsolete, so that's a strawman from you.


Why do you care?

Why do I care about weapons of mass murder being too affordable and readily available with limited accountability on who can own them? How can anyone not care? I get that caring about stuff isn't cool here.

[Spurminator]

I still don't get the entire gist of this complaint. Someone showed a poll that said 90% of respondents were in favor of gun restrictions/laws. Why don't those people simply get rid of their guns, then only 10% of the population would possibly be armed?

Someone explain this.

It's been explained to you many times. Favoring gun legislation doesn't mean favoring the removal of (or giving up) one's guns. This is not a difficult nuance.

[Spurtacular]

:lol Saying you haven't put forth an argument for the main debate is a straw man, according to you.
:lol That pretty much says it all (for every thread you ever post in).
Pavlov Chump

:lmao

Yea, you rightly walked away with your head between your legs on that note.

[Expert]

The scenario where one feels compelled to speak out against the government is far more common than the scenario where someone needs to fight government intervention with a gun. It's about being able to freely criticize. Plus, ideas are more powerful against tyranny than an AR.

The 1st Amendment isn't to placate people who want to speak out. It's to enable public dissent without legal repercussions to ensure a free society. It doesn't matter how often someone feels compelled to do it. The intent is the same. What good are words without force behind them?


So, no, the 1A is not obsolete. And I don't recall saying the 2A was obsolete, so that's a strawman from you.

That's where the entire "militia" thing is going though. Why are you denying it? Either "shall not be infringed upon" means what it says or it doesn't, and it either matters or it doesn't. Both the 1st and 2nd are in place for basically the same reason, the 2nd just enforces the 1st even if it's not that powerful.


Why do I care about weapons of mass murder being too affordable and readily available with limited accountability on who can own them? How can anyone not care? I get that caring about stuff isn't cool here.
You didn't answer the question. Why do you care?

[Expert]

Nice math work there...

If you consider the poll to be an accurate representation of the general population then it works fine. If you don't, the poll is worthless. You can't just use it when it works for you without needing to accept the facts surrounding the data.

[Spurminator]

The 1st Amendment isn't to placate people who want to speak out. It's to enable public dissent without legal repercussions to ensure a free society. It doesn't matter how often someone feels compelled to do it. The intent is the same. What good are words without force behind them?

This doesn't contradict anything I said. "Being able to freely criticize" means "enable public dissent without legal repercussions." And frequency is absolutely relevant to whether or not a Constitutional Amendment is obsolete.

But again, I'm not arguing for obsolescence. That said, if we're comparing the current-day relevance and necessity of the 1A vs. the 2A, the 1A wins easily.


That's where the entire "militia" thing is going though. Why are you denying it? Either "shall not be infringed upon" means what it says or it doesn't, and it either matters or it doesn't. Both the 1st and 2nd are in place for basically the same reason, the 2nd just enforces the 1st even if it's not that powerful.

They are two separate amendments for a reason, if they were inextricably related they'd have been included in the same amendment. There is no current scenario where the 2nd Amendment enforces the 1st. Can you name one?


You didn't answer the question. Why do you care?

I don't care about anyone's GI Joe fantasy. I do care about the easy availability of guns that can be used in mass murder because it's too easy for them to get into the wrong hands, because I care when people needlessly die at the hands of someone who should have never had that gun.

Reduce the supply, drive up prices, let the hobbyists and the wannabe militiamen buy as many as they want.

[spurraider21]

2A isn't obsolete in and of itself.

the notion that armed citizens are going to defeat a tyrannical government like the continental army did do the brits is obsolete, imo. that's just a lousy argument.

[pgardn]

If you consider the poll to be an accurate representation of the general population then it works fine. If you don't, the poll is worthless. You can't just use it when it works for you without needing to accept the facts surrounding the data.

So 100% of the population is armed...

Thats cool. Where did you pull that from?

[Pavlov]

:lol Saying you haven't put forth an argument for the main debate is a straw man, according to you.
:lol That pretty much says it all (for every thread you ever post in).:lol you still don't know what a straw man is.

[Spurtacular]

:lol you still don't know what a straw man is.

I know what a diversion is. Fact is you haven't made the case for why rocks is better than guns.

[Expert]

2A isn't obsolete in and of itself.

the notion that armed citizens are going to defeat a tyrannical government like the continental army did do the brits is obsolete, imo. that's just a lousy argument.

Is that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment? If so, what's the purpose of the 1st, and is it also obsolete?

[Expert]

So 100% of the population is armed...

Thats cool. Where did you pull that from?

Doesn't matter if they are or not unless you think only armed people were polled.

Then again, you likely have no fucking clue what I'm referring to but you have a comment just the same.

[spurraider21]

Is that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment? If so, what's the purpose of the 1st, and is it also obsolete?
nah, the original intent of the 2A also included self defense. that certainly isn't obsolete.

how would you support a claim that 1A is obsolete?

[Expert]

nah, the original intent of the 2A also included self defense. that certainly isn't obsolete.

how would you support a claim that 1A is obsolete?

It hinges on the claim that, if the intended purpose has become a futile endeavor then the narrative here is that it's obsolete.

[Pavlov]

I know what a diversion is. Fact is you haven't made the case for why rocks is better than guns.It was never my case. That's why it's your straw man.

I will say giving the children rocks is better than giving them guns. That's why I asked you if you preferred to give the kids guns.

[Spurminator]

It hinges on the claim that, if the intended purpose has become a futile endeavor then the narrative here is that it's obsolete.

The freedom to dissent without legal repercussions is not futile. It's something that happens every day.

[spurraider21]

It hinges on the claim that, if the intended purpose has become a futile endeavor then the narrative here is that it's obsolete.


how would you support a claim that 1A is obsolete?

[Expert]

The freedom to dissent without legal repercussions is not futile. It's something that happens every day.

The freedom to keep and bear arms without legal repercussions is not futile. It's something that happens every day.

It's the effect that matters. Is this freedom to dissent keeping this nation from moving towards tyranny?

[Expert]

Philo, do you understand the concept of "hinges on"?

I happen to think no amendment is obsolete. If someone here wishes to infer that the 2nd is obsolete due to the "militia" term being used, or because simple arms are not sufficient to suppress military firepower, then you'd have to consider the 1st Amendment in the same light, that simple words are not enough to suppress tyranny.

[spurraider21]

Philo, do you understand the concept of "hinges on"?

I happen to think no amendment is obsolete. If someone here wishes to infer that the 2nd is obsolete due to the "militia" term being used, or because simple arms are not sufficient to suppress military firepower, then you'd have to consider the 1st Amendment in the same light, that simple words are not enough to suppress tyranny.
i have already stated outright that i dont find 2A outdated. i find the attempted rationale of needing guns to ward off a tyrannical federal government to be a very outdated concept, and thus, incredibly weak justification

[Spurminator]

The freedom to keep and bear arms without legal repercussions is not futile. It's something that happens every day.

I agree. I'm not the one who believes the outcome of 1A or 2A rights is what matters. You do, hence....


It's the effect that matters. Is this freedom to dissent keeping this nation from moving towards tyranny?

No, it's not the effect that matters. The First Amendment protects speech. That speech can be anti-government, it can be offensive, it can be outright lies. Thousands of people, including our current POTUS, claimed that Barack Obama was born outside of the United States. It had no effect, yet they were not prosecuted from such speech (or, in Trump's case, prevented from becoming the next President) because we have the First Amendment.

The 2A allows a bunch of bozos who think they can save America from tyranny (or protect themselves from taxation, or use public lands, or whatever) to stock up on guns for some imaginary battle against the United States government. That may be a retarded fantasy, but they have the right to entertain it.

[Spurminator]

I happen to think no amendment is obsolete. If someone here wishes to infer that the 2nd is obsolete due to the "militia" term being used, or because simple arms are not sufficient to suppress military firepower, then you'd have to consider the 1st Amendment in the same light, that simple words are not enough to suppress tyranny.


It's the effect that matters.

These are two contradictory statements. Which one of these do you actually believe? Or are you just being argumentative out of boredom?

[spurraider21]

These are two contradictory statements. Which one of these do you actually believe? Or are you just being argumentative out of boredom?
Philo

[Expert]

i have already stated outright that i dont find 2A outdated. i find the attempted rationale of needing guns to ward off a tyrannical federal government to be a very outdated concept, and thus, incredibly weak justification

Needing freedom of speech to ward off a tyrannical government is an outdated concept.

I like how you used your lawyer skills to use "outdated" instead of "obsolete".

[Expert]

These are two contradictory statements. Which one of these do you actually believe? Or are you just being argumentative out of boredom?

How are they contradictory?

Does the 1st Amendment suppress tyranny?

If the government wanted to come kick your door in, could you talk them out of it?

[Blake]

How are they contradictory?

Does the 1st Amendment suppress tyranny?

If the government wanted to come kick your door in, could you talk them out of it?

Could you 2nd amendment them to keep them out?

[Expert]

Could you 2nd amendment them to keep them out?

You be the first one through the door, we'll both find out at the same time.

The point, cuck, is that once someone decides they want to come kick your door in, you've lost the battle. The point of both amendments is to avoid getting to that point.

[Pavlov]

:lol DMC reminding everyone he will kill you.

[Spurtacular]

It was never my case (that rocks are better than guns).

Nothing you've written supports this claim. You've basically admitted to being a little faggot and casting aspersions.

[Pavlov]

Nothing you've written supports this claim. You've basically admitted to being a little faggot and casting aspersions.Nothing I've written disproves something I never said?

:lol

[Spurtacular]

Nothing I've written disproves something I never said?

:lol

I know you want to talk around it; your talk did not condemn the stupidity of the rocks solution; rather it aided it. Your actions speak for themselves.

[Pavlov]

I know you want to talk around it; your talk did not condemn the stupidity of the rocks solution; rather it aided it. Your actions speak for themselves."Rather aided it"

:lol

I asked you if you wanted the kids to have guns instead.

You still haven't answered.

:lol

[Spurminator]

How are they contradictory?

Post 1: You don't believe either amendment is obsolete on the basis that their effectiveness matters.

Post 2: It's the effect that matters.


Does the 1st Amendment suppress tyranny?

If the government wanted to come kick your door in, could you talk them out of it?

Strawman. I've already said the 1st Amendment isn't about effectiveness, and that would include suppressing tyranny.

[spurraider21]

Needing freedom of speech to ward off a tyrannical government is an outdated concept.

I like how you used your lawyer skills to use "outdated" instead of "obsolete".
i'm using them interchangeably.

i dont think anybody here has tried to argue that we need the 1st amendment to ward off a tyrannical government. but there are people with fantasies of taking up arms against the US military, and actually use that to argue they need the 2A. i think self defense is a more than adequate explanation without pretending to be the next paul revere

[Spurtacular]

"Rather aided it"

:lol

I asked you if you wanted the kids to have guns instead.

You still haven't answered.

:lol

Your actions speak for themselves. Put forth a plan that is better than rocks if you're for the guns instead.

[Pavlov]

Your actions speak for themselves. Put forth a plan that is better than rocks if you're for the guns instead.:lol demands

[pgardn]

Doesn't matter if they are or not unless you think only armed people were polled.

Then again, you likely have no fucking clue what I'm referring to but you have a comment just the same.

I have a clue you are pulling % 's out of your ass.
Yep.

[Expert]

Post 1: You don't believe either amendment is obsolete on the basis that their effectiveness matters.

Post 2: It's the effect that matters.



Poor job of paraphrasing.

Actually I said this:

"I happen to think no amendment is obsolete." (I did not give a reason why) "If someone here wishes to infer that the 2nd is obsolete due to the "militia" term being used, or because simple arms are not sufficient to suppress military firepower, then you'd have to consider the 1st Amendment in the same light, that simple words are not enough to suppress tyranny." (This statement explains why the two are tied together and if one is obsolete for those reasons, so is the other)


Strawman. I've already said the 1st Amendment isn't about effectiveness, and that would include suppressing tyranny.

It certainly has an intent, does it not? What do you suppose that is?

[Spurtacular]

:lol demands

I've sufficiently pointed out how you're here to run interference for your cause instead of putting forth a valid counter argument. You're only demonstrating that further.

[Spurtacular]

https://i2.wp.com/www.denverpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/op10referspic2.jpg?w=620&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C9999px

[Pavlov]

I've sufficiently pointed out how you're here to run interference for your cause instead of putting forth a valid counter argument. You're only demonstrating that further.:lol you've pointed out you made several straw men and now you're butthurt that you got called on it.

[Spurtacular]

:lol you've pointed out you made several straw men and now you're butthurt that you got called on it.

Tell us your idea that is better than rocks, or keep waving that white flag high. :lol

[Pavlov]

Tell us your idea that is better than rocks, or keep waving that white flag high. :lolThey already have armed security.

You didn't know that.

:lol

[Spurtacular]

They already have armed security.


Then why do they feel the need to arm themselves with rocks?

[Pavlov]

Then why do they feel the need to arm themselves with rocks?Ask them.

Oh, they actually answered that question.:lol

Did you read any of this thread or the linked story at all?

[Spurtacular]

Ask them.

Oh, they actually answered that question.:lol

Did you read any of this thread or the linked story at all?

Oh, so you're a fan of capitulating to the students' wills? Does that mean you'll be in favor of gun-carrying students in places in which this is what they want?

Also, :lol at you trying to pass the buck to young teenagers.

[Spurtacular]

:cry

Also, you said you had a better plan than rocks; what is it? You're just naming stuff that was "already" there.

[Pavlov]

Oh, so you're a fan of capitulating to the students' wills? Does that mean you'll be in favor of gun-carrying students in places in which this is what they want?

Also, :lol at you trying to pass the buck to young teenagers.I'm fine with the kids' not having guns.

Do want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

[Pavlov]

Also, you said you had a better plan than rocks; what is it?Quote where I said I had a better plan.
You're just naming stuff that was "already" there.Exactly.

[Spurtacular]

I'm fine with the kids' not having guns.

Do want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

You said you had a plan that was better than rocks. Do you not claim this now?

Also, if you're fine with rocks, then you are fine with weapons in the classroom.

[Pavlov]

You said you had a plan that was better than rocks. Do you not claim this now?Give me the quote.


Also, if you're fine with rocks, then you are fine with weapons in the classroom.Bio classes have scalpels in them. Shop classes have hammers and saws. Home Ec classes have knives. Are you going to clutch your pearls at those?

Yes or no.

[Pavlov]

Look at the killing fields on the grounds of this Austin school!

https://www.austinisd.org/sites/default/files/field/announcement_image/D5dD2cJXPji1F3BIfu-V6gj9-F9qEq5ox9zIySO1TKU.jpg

So many weapons!

[Spurtacular]

Bio classes have scalpels in them. Shop classes have hammers and saws. Home Ec classes have knives. Are you going to clutch your pearls at thos?

Yes or no.

Okay, now we've established that you're fine with responsible (and possibly irresponsible) students handling weaponry.

[Pavlov]

Okay, now we've established that you're fine with responsible (and possibly irresponsible) students handling weaponry.OK, now we've established that you're clutching your pearls at hammers in shop class.

[Spurtacular]

OK, now we've established that you're clutching your pearls at hammers in shop class.

You like students to have random murder weapons; but you're against proper self-defense weapons. This pretty much sums up the utter stupidity of the liberal ideology to which you subscribe.

[Pavlov]

You like students to have random murder weapons; but you're against proper self-defense weapons. This pretty much sums up the utter stupidity of the liberal ideology to which you subscribe.Do you want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Do you want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

I think they would have a case that their second amendment rights are being infringed regardless of whether I would want them to have them.

[Pavlov]

I think they would have a case that their second amendment rights are being infringed regardless of whether I would want them to have them.You didn't answer the question.

Do you want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

You didn't answer the question.

Do you want the kids to have guns?

Yes or no.

I think they have second amendment rights that you are treading on.

[Pavlov]

I think they have second amendment rights that you are treading on.You didn't answer the question.

Do you want the kids to have guns?

[Spurtacular]

You didn't answer the question.

Do you want the kids to have guns?

I regarded the crux of the matter. You'd rather get lost in the weeds. Par.

[Pavlov]

I regarded the crux of the matter. You'd rather get lost in the weeds. Par.:lol you ran away again. Par.

[Spurtacular]

:lol you ran away again. Par.

Why are you for taking away these students' second amendment rights? Why would you rather give them inadequate protection? Did you not learn from Parkland?

[Pavlov]

Why are you for taking away these students' second amendment rights? Why would you rather give them inadequate protection? Did you not learn from Parkland?
Do you want the kids to have guns?

[Spurtacular]

Do you want the kids to have guns?

I want their second amendment rights to be respected. Would you take away that right?

[ducks]

rocks to a gun fight?