Guns and Strippers thread! Best ever!
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="590554" data-time="1466594377">
<div>
<p>Would REALLY like to know the reasoning behind my post being deleted.<br><br>
Just PM me. I won't bite</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>FYI your posts are not deleted, they are hidden. Any mod can still see them.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="590602" data-time="1466626655">
<div>
<p>FYI your posts are not deleted, they are hidden. <strong>Any mod can still see them.</strong></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>What about for the 3 of us who aren't mods? :)</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="590648" data-time="1466636135">
<div>
<p>What about for the 3 of us who aren't mods? :)</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I thought i was the only one!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Edit: Ah, so it's us three then</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="590602" data-time="1466626655">
<div>
<p>FYI your posts are not deleted, they are hidden. Any mod can still see them.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Nice dancing on a pinhead.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Didn't answer my question though. Not that I'm surprised.</p> -
<p>jesus it's high school all over again</p>
<p> </p>
<p><img src="http://cuddlebuggery.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/breakdown.gif" alt="breakdown.gif"></p> -
<p>Ok, here we go.</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590542" data-time="1466589585">
<div>
<p>Okay, let's go through it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Point 1: You support an assault weapons ban. That is okay. However, none of the four pieces of legislation voted down by the senate included a ban on assault weapons so I don't see how that is relevant to the discussion. I'm not opposed to an assault weapons ban in principle. I should not that the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was not regarded as successful by most non-partisan groups. Legislation that was successful (like the Australian gun buyback) was compulsory and would therefore be unconstitutional in the United States. I don't think anyone thinks that individuals should be able to keep a stock of grenades so I think we will acknowledge that people's right to own weapons as limitations. I don't in principle oppose that limitation including the ban of assault weapons. However, I understand it can be difficult to define these terms in laws. For instance, if you banned all semi automatic weapons you would ban most guns (this is what I have read, I do not claim to be an expert on makes and models of guns).</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yes, my personal belief is that nobody needs to buy an assault rifle. I understand that people can have a great interest in them and maybe want to fire one, but I fail to see why anybody needs to own one. It's not relevant directly to the discussion about what was and what wasn't voted down, but it's showing you my position so I can't be accused of anything else later. I don't like guns, I never have. I respect other peoples decision to own and enjoy them, but not when it comes to things like this - similar to your thoughts on grenades.</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590542" data-time="1466589585">
<div>
<p>Point 2: These things are implied by the law you support. You support a law which allows the government to suspend the constitutional rights of its citizens. You support this process occurring through secretive list which people can be placed on for having committed no crimes. This is a list which individuals are not notified that they are on and have limited ways of getting off. You have claimed that one of the pieces of legislation makes it easier to get off the list, yet you have ignored my question as to how the legislation enabled that.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Given that you support all of the above what is to stop a government determining that other groups (say Conservatives) are more likely to commit acts of gun violence? What is to stop the government just adding people to the list who annoy them? If the list has no oversight then what is to stop the government from doing this? It's necessary to mention this because this is an obvious consequence of the law you support. I suppose the question is: how would you create a system of government oversight that would stop the government adding random people it didn't like to the list?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I didn't imply anything. This came directly from you, not me. You talk about these lists and them being secretive, but how do people get on them in the first place - you are defined by the company you keep, the communications you make and the things that you do. And yes, sometimes you may find yourself involved with things which you didn't directly had anything to do with. But we aren't talking about blocking a constitutional right to buy food, gain shelter, and clothing. We aren't even talking about things like buying a car, joining a gun club, or downloading hardcore porn. We are talking about your right to walk into a store, and buy the necessary tools to walk into a highly populated area and slaughter a large amount of innocent beings. You simply cannot compare basic constitutional rights when talking about buying a car vs buying weapons. And that is what each of the 4 bills which were voted down were about. </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590542" data-time="1466589585">
<div>
<p> How would you feel if you were an Arab, had committed no crimes and were stripped of a constitutional right? Of course, these people will assume the law is racist.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't believe anybody is on a list simply because they are an Arab. That is indeed, racis, but not relevant to this discussion.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590542" data-time="1466589585">
<div>
<p>Point 3: I'm not trying to get you to say anything. I'm just telling you what affect your policies would have.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Do you believe that people who are convicted of domestic abuse should not be able to buy guns? If someone like Tony Veitch wanted to go hunting with his mates, I wouldn't see a problem with that. This individual had been suspected of having links to terrorism but there was no evidence so nothing happened. You specifically mention that he shouldn't have been able to go and buy an assault weapon but I don't believe that distinction is important here. If he had bought a pistol, a lot of people still would have died. I'm not sure if you are saying that people suspected of terrorism shouldn't be able to buy assault weapons or shouldn't be able to buy guns at all.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>No, my policy's would have nobody buying assault rifles. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Yes, I 100% believe Tony Veitch should not be allowed to buy a weapon. Ever read his statements? Direct quote - "I lashed out". Imagine what could have happened if he lashed out when in his cupboard was an assault rifle capable of firing 10 bullets per second.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In my opinion, Marteen shouldn't have been able to buy a gun because he had been on these lists AND domestic abuse. I'm unwavering on this view, and honestly, not even sure why I need to defend it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590542" data-time="1466589585">
<div>
<p>Point 4: Well, now you are putting words into my mouth. Again, none of this legislation was about assault weapon bans so I don't know why you keep bringing that up. I have never said I oppose an assault weapons ban but I have shown skepticism over whether or not it would work. I do think it is highly messed up for someone to have their constitutional rights affected by what members of their family do.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Granted, maybe I just implied that ... We will have to agree to disagree on the last sentence.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Now, lets look at the 4 laws which were rejected. Law 1:</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">The Senate rejected first a Republican proposal to update the background check system for gun purchases, which would have required states to add more information on mental health records to a national database. It also included a provision to alert law enforcement agencies when an individual who was on a government terror watch list in the last five years buys a gun.
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>What is unreasonable and unconstitutional about this? People with mental health issues should be treated differently for gun purchases just like people with vision issues should be subject to different rules when buying a car license!</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">A second proposal to expand the background check system for those buying guns to require checks at gun shows and for online purchases went down 44-56</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm shocked that you can even buy a gun online, honestly.</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">A Republican proposal to delay gun sales to individuals included on a government terror watch list failed in a mostly party-line vote of 53-47. The measure was sponsored by Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn. The bill would allow a judge to permanently block a purchase if the court determined probable cause that the individual is involved in terrorist activity</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Delay, not block. just DELAY. And then allow a judge to reside over final decison. Still can't see what is so contentious.</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">And a Democratic option that sought to bar all gun sales to those individuals on the terror watch list failed 47-53, the second time the proposal went down to defeat after a mass shooting. </blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>This seems to be what is causing the most contention between you and me hydro. I think I've dealt with this above, so we will have to agree to disagree.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590515" data-time="1466579013">
<div>
<p>How were they making it easier to get off the No Fly List?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="590495" data-time="1466574587">
<div>
<p>There were 2 parts to it. 1. Restrict people on these lists from buying guns, 2. Make it easier for people to get off them.</p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I'll retract this. As I misread, this is bill 5 which hasn't gone to vote yet. I'm sure though, it will get trashed.</p> -
<p>For the cutie cutie set: when you are having a party to reveal the gender of your unborn kid, there are party favours called Guns or Glitter.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Necklaces that say Guns (for a boy) and Glitter (for a girl), plus sweet little cutouts of guns or princess crowns.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Awwwww.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> :puke: :Bang_Head:</p> -
<p>This story gave me BAD ALLERGIES.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/little-kids/81410011/mum-broke-down-when-she-found-out-why-her-little-girl-was-standing-on-the-toilet'>http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/little-kids/81410011/mum-broke-down-when-she-found-out-why-her-little-girl-was-standing-on-the-toilet</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>And then there are the comments, which just show how fucked America is.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>One woman: My kids do drills and think they are fun!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Jesus.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
<p> </p>
Texas mum who killed two daughters before being shot by police was a gun advocate
<div><span>6:37 PM Sunday Jun 26, 2016</span></div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div><img height="310" src="http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201627/christysheats_620x310.jpg" width="620" alt="christysheats_620x310.jpg">Christy Sheats with her oldest daughter Taylor, who she shot and killed. Photo / Facebook</div>
<p>A Texas mum who shot and killed her two daughters posted a message on Facebook in March demanding the right to keep semiautomatic handguns.</p>
<p>Christy Sheats, 42, got into an argument with her two daughters on Friday afternoon local time. Police say she shot and killed Taylor Sheats, 22, and Madison Sheats, 17, before being shot by police.</p>
<p>Police arrived at the normally quiet neighbourhood in Fulshear, west of Houston, after a series of 911 calls alerted them to the dispute.</p>
<p>One of the daughters died at the scene and the other was transported to a local hospital but did not survive.</p>
<img src="http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/201627/madison_620x310.jpg" alt="madison_620x310.jpg">Madison and Taylor Sheats who were shot and killed by their mother after an argument. Photo / Facebook
<p>On Facebook, Fort Ben County Sheriff's Office wrote the girls' mother refused to lower her weapon when police arrived and was shot and killed by a Fulshear officer.</p>
<div> </div>
<p>Fort Ben Sheriff Troy Nehls posted an update on Saturday afternoon.</p>
<p>"As everyone is certainly aware, we had a terrible incident last night that involved the deaths of three people," he wrote.</p>
<p><strong>"An unimaginable tragedy that it seems we see too often."</strong></p>
<p>He thanked deputies and detectives for keeping the community safe and offered his prayers to the Sheats family.</p>
<p>The <i>Houston Chronicle</i> reported the girls' father was at home when the shooting took place. He was not injured but was taken to hospital in a distressed state.</p>
<p>"He's going through a very difficult time," Sheriff Nehls said.</p>
<p>In March, Christy wrote on Facebook: "It would be horribly tragic if my ability to protect myself or my family were to be taken away, but that's exactly what Democrats are determined to do by banning semiautomatic weapons."</p>
<p>In January, she shared a post with the following message: "I have 10 guns. Obama wants eight of my guns. How many guns do I have? That's right, I have 10 guns."</p>
<p>The neighbourhood where the shooting took place was described as a "comfortable, middle class subdivision" by the <i>Chronicle</i>.</p>
<p>Christy posted a photo of herself and her two daughters in 2015. She wrote: "Happy Daughter's Day to my two amazing, sweet, kind, beautiful, intelligent girls. I love and treasure you both more than you could ever possibly know."</p>
<p>- <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://news.com.au'>news.com.au</a></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Terrible, but I'm not sure I'd call it a tragedy. In what universe does mum shoot daughters seem de rigeur? Only in the US of A. When I have an argument with CF Jnr he gets timeout or his ipad privileges taken away. Clearly I'm a bit soft....</p> -
<p>See, that's the thing. It escalates from a family spat or someone getting passed on the highway or breaking up with a boyfriend into a homicide in 0.2s.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The whole 'need guns for protecting my family' line is fucking horseshit. How many of these deaths is a FUCKING INTRUDER???</p> -
<p>THAT is what better gun laws could help prevent. Idiots getting the red mist and happen to have a semi-automatic on hand.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>However as mentioned a few times it's not so much the gun laws, but the gun culture in the USA that needs to change. That is a very difficult proposition. It really is a clusterfuck over there. As I've said before, it's like a big game of laser force except everyone has real guns.</p>