I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Extreme Humor

Asylum

Funny Games

Gorilla Mask

Oddee

FreeGame Heaven

Funny Stuff

123 Games

Not Healthy

Angelsfire.nl

Viva La Games

Pugorama

I hate retail

Comics Alliance

eBaum Nation

Hecklerspray

Comic World

Caykeyfi Games

Free Samples

Crazy Games

Insane Pictures

Vote4Jokes

Pandasmash

Hot Games



Back to Listing

L.A. Confidential

Hits: 1982 | Rating: (1.8) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: buddy
Page: 1 2 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Sunday, September 12, 2004 10:22:57 AM
Err, i forgot to mention how American gun ownership is at an ALL TIME high, while homicide rates, particularly gun homicides, are dropping like a rock.

r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Sunday, September 12, 2004 10:18:12 AM
I think that statistsics are a perfectly valid means of getting a point across, escpecially when the other side, the anti-gun lefties, use absolutely no statistics and rely completely on en emotional argument to make their case.

And yeah, the point about other countries is riduculous, Switzerland, for example, has one of the highest (if not the highest) rates of machine gun ownership by private citizens and one of the lowest rates of gun crimes.


gizmo331
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 1262 Posts
Sunday, September 12, 2004 1:59:21 AM
R2, if you were really smart, you'd know that people can't be boiled down to numbers and statistics don't mean squat.

However, as I stated before, I do NOT approve of a ban on assault-weapons (which is a bogus term anyways because anything can be an assault weapon if you threaten somebody with it).

And whoever said move to (insert foriegn country here) because they have fewer gun deaths, shut your f*cking mouth. When you adjust for gun deaths per capita you'd find that the gun death rate in any other country is about the same as the U.S. or Canada.


r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 5:56:45 PM
From the proverbial horse's mouth:

"The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons – anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun – can only increase that chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."

This is a quote from Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center, one of the most radical anti-gun groups in the country. This shows the level of deception that the Gun-Fearing Wussies will stoop to in order to push their totalitarian policies onto the American people.


r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 5:54:26 PM
Well, considering that "assault-weapons" were used in, well, basically no crimes before the ban, I don't think that the ban itself was anything more than an attempt by the looney left to make it harder for law-abiding citizens to own the firearms of their choice.

A compilation of statistics from 48 metropolitan police departments from 1980-1994 showed that “Assault weapons” were used in less than 2% of crimes involving firearms and 0.25% of all violent crime before the enactment of any national or state “assault weapons” ban.

Trust me on this, there wasn't an epidemic of drive-by bayonetings before the ban was enacted. It's a stupid, misguided, law that existed only for the purpose of stifling the rights of lawful gun owners.


eastsiderepp
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 7318 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 3:36:32 PM
Oh, your an NRA member. That explains the whole idiot hippies thing, kinda had me scared for a minute.

But I can't imagine that the assault weapons ban is made to prevent illegal use of guns, just overall use of whatever weapons it bans.


r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 3:06:35 PM
Just to make another point, here are some survey results from a Time magazine survey:

How would you rate the effectiveness of
the Brady Bill and the “assault weapons”
ban in preventing the illegal use and
distribution of guns?

0.52% Very effective
3.79% Somewhat effective
6.19% Somewhat effective
87.27% Not at all effective
2.23% Don't know

a different point than the one you were making, but interesting nonetheless.

As for your comment about using a handgun instead of a rifle.... I finf it completely surprising that a anti-gun person such as yourself would support the use of handguns instead of rifles, usually it goes the opposite way. Personally, I don't have a rifle for defensive purposes, it is just not my preference, I prefer pistols and shotguns, however, some people swear by it, so they should be allowed to use them if they choose to. And that is fine with me, as a rifle is really less dangerous in the hands of a panicked individual tha


r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 3:02:44 PM
Interesting results in that survey. Frankly, I believe that the high level of people that thought the ban should be renewed is simply because of the massive amound of misinformation and outright lies spread by the liberal media about the ban. I imagine that if the survey takers had asked the people whether they supported banning the certain features that are covered under the ban the results would have been quite different. That kinda beings me back to my earlier point about the very name of the ban being misleading, in that there is actually no such thing as an "assault weapon" it is simply a scary word made up by Dianne Feinstein and her hyprocritical cronies.

Osprey39
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 1409 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 1:19:08 PM
As for the statistics i gave:

http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.o...


Osprey39
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 1409 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 1:01:58 PM
I was exaggerating with the bazooka...

I know what the difference between a semi-automatic and a full automatic is, but I don't see why anyone would need anything more than a handgun for self-defense.


r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 8:44:32 AM
IF you don't see why someone would want a semi-automatic to defend themselves then you obviously know nothing about firearms. The only alternative to a semi-automatic rifle (if we are leaving handguns completely out the equation) is a shotgun (inaccurate, but effective, but can cause severe collateral damage in confined spaces) or a bolt-action rifle (completely out of the question, as you have to charge the bolt after each round is fired. Semi-auto simply means that each time you pull the trigger, a round is fired from the gun, just like in any hunting rifle or handgu; it is not automatic, that is, it doesn't continually shoot rounds as you depress the trigger.

And no, a bazooka is, by definition, not a defensive weapon in the first place, and second of all, it is considered a DD or Destructive Device and would fall under the National Firearms Act of 1934 and is illegal anyways. Try again.


r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Saturday, September 11, 2004 8:41:56 AM
2/3 of the general public don't support the ban, once they actually learn that it doesn't ban machine-guns as the liberal media would like them to belive. I have seen poll after poll after poll this month and have yet to see one in which the majority of Americans support the ban once the truth gets out.

And your NRA ststistic is complete bullpoo, speaking as a Lifetime NRA member and someone who knows hundreds of other NRA members, I have never heard of any of them, or any NRA member, period, supporting the ban. NRA members are the most educated group of people when it comes to gun laws and are (the vast, vast majority anyway) too smart to support such a toothless and absurd piece of legislation.


Osprey39
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 1409 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 11:58:04 PM
What does supporting the Asault Weapons Ban have to do with being a hippy? 2/3 of the general people support the ban, and even 1/3 of NRA members. So that makes most of us idiot hippies, I guess. And I still don't see why anyone would need a semi-automatic to defend themself anyway. What next? People wanting bazookas to "defend" themselves?

r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 6:24:30 PM
Hippy scum like you guys will always lose, get used to it.

r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 6:21:01 PM
Lol, you Idiot Hippies™ are such dippoos...

You DO realize that today was the last working day for Congress before the ban expires on Monday.

You lose, HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA.

Sucks for you. All your Congress are belong to us.


eastsiderepp
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 7318 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 2:25:09 PM
Yeah, I signed it too. I don't know if it'll help, but it certainly can't hurt...

r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 12:19:59 PM
Yeah, I forgot to mention the bayonet thing.

Also, the AWB doesn't stop ANYONE from buying an "assault-weapon" as the ban only prohibits the use of pre-ban parts on post-ban manufactured guns or the manufacture of new guns that fall under the terms of the ban. You can still walk into any gun store and buy weapons that fall under the ban, they were just manufactured pre-1994.

A riduculous piece of useless legislation created by the looney left.


ash0528
Male, 30-39, Western US
 16 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 11:20:11 AM
I also meant to add this point; it is still legal to tape a knife to the end of a stick. Go figure

ash0528
Male, 30-39, Western US
 16 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 11:16:08 AM
Bravo r2korn, and smarth! However one point I would like to make is the AWB did not ban "certain cosmetic features""to look a little scarier". In the final draft the net result was a ban on bayonet mounts on rifles. Anyone can still buy an AR-15 (civilian version), or the Chinese version of the AK-47 in semi-only, as long as one can not attach a knife to the flash suppressor. Oh, wait, flash suppressors were banned also, so now I think there called muzzle ports. But I know I sleep better knowing no one will ever be able to stab me with their "assault-weapon" This was classic legislation passed for campaign PR, and had nothing to do with any kind of assault-weapon ban.

smarth
Male, 18-29, Western US
 3 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 10:42:36 AM
Semi-auto rifles have never been the weapon of choice for drive-by gangster scumbags, so I'm not sure how the AWB would have affected the number of drive-bys. My guess is that tougher laws like "three strikes you're out" had a much greater effect on the number of gun crimes committed. Also, it doesn't matter if you're "for" or "against" the right to keep and bear arms. Self-defense is an inalienable right, and no idiot who doesn't even know the difference between semi-auto and full-auto has any business sitting his fat ass down in the middle of this issue. Glad there are at least a few here who know their asses from a whole in the ground. Liberty or death, motherdraters.

r2korn
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 23 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 9:57:07 AM
You people aren't very smart, are you?

The AWB bans SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapons that have certain cosmetic features that make them safer, more ergonomic, or simpler to use, and that cause them to have the physical appearance of military weapons. You twats don't realize that assault weapons are not machine guns; machine guns were banned by the National Firearms Act of 1934. "Assault-weapons" (which is a miuse of terms anyways, as there is no such thing as an "assault-weapon" in firearms lexicon, there are assault rifles, meaning the fully-automatic machine guns that the military uses, but no such thing as an "assault weapon")are no more dangerous in reality than any other rifle, they fire the exact same ammunition, semi-automatically (one round at a time) and just happen to look a little scarier to Idiot Hippys™ than a standard hunting rifle.


goluckyjoe
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 160 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 7:25:52 AM
I like the idea of a federal funded 'gun saftey' program required to buy guns, I think it would help cut back on the accidental deaths, although when Jimbo and his friends are out drinking and shooting their firearms someone is bound to get shot somewhere.

davala
Male, 18-29, Europe
 17100 Posts
Friday, September 10, 2004 2:00:36 AM
Nothing is more true than that. Or a crowbar, or baseball bat... whatever happened to a good ole' frying pan *PAAAANG*. Cant imagine many people would survive that now, and hell if they do they will be mentally scarred, and in jail. Good detterent.

buddy
Male, 30-39, Western US
 18663 Posts
Thursday, September 09, 2004 9:31:45 PM
Almost everyone who is shot is killed by someone they know. The cases of people using guns in self defense are few and far between. And when someone does break into your house, you can kill them with a good old fashioned shotgun if need be, you don't need a frickin machine gun.

rgp
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
 219 Posts
Thursday, September 09, 2004 8:37:37 PM
Considering crimes like drive-bys and the like dropped by about 2/3 since this ban came into action, I would hope they renewed it. I am all for people having the right to bare arms but I hardly think it's neccesary for someone to own an assault rifle. Just imo.

Page: 1 2 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.