Re: Your Weekly Mass Shooting

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:46 pm

I don't have the energy... not that I was invited.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:47 pm

tTy wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

I'm in!

I'm prolly not.

Oh okay. Want to post pictures of man nipples instead?

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:47 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
tTy wrote:

I'm prolly not.

Oh okay. Want to post pictures of man nipples instead?

Is that legal?

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:48 pm

xsanguine wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Oh okay. Want to post pictures of man nipples instead?

Is that legal?

As long as it isn't a single pixel of a female nipple were good.

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:48 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

Is that legal?

As long as it isn't a single pixel of a female nipple were good.

I'm pretty good at photoshop. I bet you I can smuggle one in there.

by **tTy** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:49 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
tTy wrote:

I'm prolly not.

Oh okay. Want to post pictures of man nipples instead?

I went to the walk-in clinic because I have an inch long old man skin lesion on my back that has been getting larger. I could post a pic of that!!!

SPOILER ALERT:

More fucking psoriasis..... Starting to get a lot of that shit. Good news is = I'm on roids now!!!! don't fucking piss me off, i own gunz and i WILL rage on you.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:49 pm

xsanguine wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

As long as it isn't a single pixel of a female nipple were good.

I'm pretty good at photoshop. I bet you I can smuggle one in there.

You best watch your back if you do that

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:52 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

I'm pretty good at photoshop. I bet you I can smuggle one in there.

You best watch your back if you do that

If you run interference for me I will split it with you.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:53 pm

xsanguine wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

You best watch your back if you do that

If you run interference for me I will split it with you.

Deal.

I'm not sure what I just agreed to. Maybe I'll go to the other site and start a thread that Gomer can't keep his eyes away from. Like something about knitting.

by **Turtleneck** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:53 pm

Somehow this thread got even more boring.

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:53 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

If you run interference for me I will split it with you.

Deal.

I'm not sure what I just agreed to. Maybe I'll go to the other site and start a thread that Gomer can't keep his eyes away from. Like something about knitting.

Gomer is a huge fan of me.

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:54 pm

Turtleneck wrote:Somehow this thread got even more boring.

Did you take your nap this afternoon?

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:54 pm

xsanguine wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Deal.

I'm not sure what I just agreed to. Maybe I'll go to the other site and start a thread that Gomer can't keep his eyes away from. Like something about knitting.

Gomer is a huge fan of me.

Oh good then. In that case I think we're in the clear to post a single pixel of female nipple

by **Turtleneck** Thu Dec 03, 2015 8:57 pm

xsanguine wrote:
Turtleneck wrote:Somehow this thread got even more boring.

Did you take your nap this afternoon?

I do not believe in naps. No joke. I despise napping.

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:07 pm

Turtleneck wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

Did you take your nap this afternoon?

I do not believe in naps. No joke. I despise napping.

On the real I'm the same way. I feel worse after a nap. It's either 4 or 5 hours plus, or nothing.

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:11 pm

Nigel is such a cock tease.

Pulling that shit and then vanishing in the night.

Fucking asshole. Your Weekly Mass Shooting - Page 11 502811600

by **NigelUno** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:14 pm

xsanguine wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

Ummm...OK?

I'm not sure what your point is though.

I think mine was (maybe) no one needs a gun like that for "hunting". You went all haywire after that, so I'm not sure where we are at this point.

I don't need a gun. I don't need an iphone, I don't need a PS4. I don't need a pretty wife or a leather wallet or a 50 inch flat screen or season tickets or a corvette. I don't need any of these things.

You wouldn't have happened to be saying that because you were, by some wild... crazy... insane... chance implying that some entity should be limiting them, right? Like I stated in my very first reply to you. That couldn't be it, could it? I'm not going to assume... but I'm hoping you'll explain the point of going through all of that just to say "Well... I don't know where we are at this point."

Shit, dude. I asked Goose a question (or two), and then you had to butt in.

I guess I was trying to ask if Goose had a threshold (i.e., is there any type of weapon that he would be comfortable setting limits on...as Gomer pointed out there have been various guns or other weapons that have been outlawed)...or is Goose comfortable with people owning whatever the hell they want (with absolutely no limitations whatsoever).

I mean God forbid anyone take away someone's constitutional right to own an assault rifle to shoot hogs from a helicopter. I'm sure that's what our founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. Maybe they could hunt on foot? Instead of pretending they were in a bad video game? Just a thought.

by **NigelUno** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:15 pm

xsanguine wrote:Nigel is such a cock tease.

Pulling that shit and then vanishing in the night.

Fucking asshole.

I always get the last word. Motherfucker!!!

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:27 pm

NigelUno wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

I don't need a gun. I don't need an iphone, I don't need a PS4. I don't need a pretty wife or a leather wallet or a 50 inch flat screen or season tickets or a corvette. I don't need any of these things.

You wouldn't have happened to be saying that because you were, by some wild... crazy... insane... chance implying that some entity should be limiting them, right? Like I stated in my very first reply to you. That couldn't be it, could it? I'm not going to assume... but I'm hoping you'll explain the point of going through all of that just to say "Well... I don't know where we are at this point."

Shit, dude. I asked Goose a question (or two), and then you had to butt in.

I guess I was trying to ask if Goose had a threshold (i.e., is there any type of weapon that he would be comfortable setting limits on...as Gomer pointed out there have been various guns or other weapons that have been outlawed)...or is Goose comfortable with people owning whatever the hell they want (with absolutely no limitations whatsoever).

I mean God forbid anyone take away someone's constitutional right to own an assault rifle to shoot hogs from a helicopter. I'm sure that's what our founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. Maybe they could hunt on foot? Instead of pretending they were in a bad video game? Just a thought.

heh, fair enough. I won't pursue it further... I guess when I see something I want to fight about I see red and want to go in at it. I've had a lot of coffee tonight and can't stop doing pushups. Maybe I'll go bugger the wife...

Meh, the founding fathers were a bunch of assholes. Fuck those guys.

by **Turtleneck** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:27 pm

NigelUno wrote:
xsanguine wrote:

I don't need a gun. I don't need an iphone, I don't need a PS4. I don't need a pretty wife or a leather wallet or a 50 inch flat screen or season tickets or a corvette. I don't need any of these things.

You wouldn't have happened to be saying that because you were, by some wild... crazy... insane... chance implying that some entity should be limiting them, right? Like I stated in my very first reply to you. That couldn't be it, could it? I'm not going to assume... but I'm hoping you'll explain the point of going through all of that just to say "Well... I don't know where we are at this point."

Shit, dude. I asked Goose a question (or two), and then you had to butt in.

I guess I was trying to ask if Goose had a threshold (i.e., is there any type of weapon that he would be comfortable setting limits on...as Gomer pointed out there have been various guns or other weapons that have been outlawed)...or is Goose comfortable with people owning whatever the hell they want (with absolutely no limitations whatsoever).

I mean God forbid anyone take away someone's constitutional right to own an assault rifle to shoot hogs from a helicopter. I'm sure that's what our founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. Maybe they could hunt on foot? Instead of pretending they were in a bad video game? Just a thought.

Cowards shoot hogs from helicopters. I would not mind if that guy fell out of the helicopter and became dinner for some wild hogs.

by Guest Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:28 pm

Nigel or anyone, let me ask you 2 simple questions. See if you can come up with a convincing answer to #2.

Can we all agree that these people broke at least 10 and probably closer to 20 or 30 existing laws?

If you can agree to that why on earth do you think passing another law regarding guns is going to do anything at all to prevent this type of killing?

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:32 pm

Turtleneck wrote:
NigelUno wrote:

Shit, dude. I asked Goose a question (or two), and then you had to butt in.

I guess I was trying to ask if Goose had a threshold (i.e., is there any type of weapon that he would be comfortable setting limits on...as Gomer pointed out there have been various guns or other weapons that have been outlawed)...or is Goose comfortable with people owning whatever the hell they want (with absolutely no limitations whatsoever).

I mean God forbid anyone take away someone's constitutional right to own an assault rifle to shoot hogs from a helicopter. I'm sure that's what our founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. Maybe they could hunt on foot? Instead of pretending they were in a bad video game? Just a thought.

Cowards shoot hogs from helicopters. I would not mind if that guy fell out of the helicopter and became dinner for some wild hogs.

They should certainly have the freedom to hunt dishonorably. Your Weekly Mass Shooting - Page 11 3742235224

When I used to have to drive up to Fremont I'd drive by this fenced in "hunting" facility. Basically they raise the deer and then when they get a client they put it in a 4 acre fenced in area and the rich fuck probably uses a 30-30 to shoot it from 200 yards away. Fucking weird.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:33 pm

LooseGoose wrote:Nigel or anyone, let me ask you 2 simple questions. See if you can come up with a convincing answer to #2.

Can we all agree that these people broke at least 10 and probably closer to 20 or 30 existing laws?

If you can agree to that why on earth do you think passing another law regarding guns is going to do anything at all to prevent this type of killing?

People speed on highways a lot. Like, all the time. If you wanted to stop speeding, you wouldn't put in more laws about speeding, it wouldn't work. You would put more cops on the highway to actually catch people breaking the law before some speeder murders 14 people.

I'm not sure what my point is. I just thought of those words.

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:34 pm

LooseGoose wrote:Nigel or anyone, let me ask you 2 simple questions. See if you can come up with a convincing answer to #2.

Can we all agree that these people broke at least 10 and probably closer to 20 or 30 existing laws?

If you can agree to that why on earth do you think passing another law regarding guns is going to do anything at all to prevent this type of killing?

And really, only one of those laws should be needed to put those people away for the rest of their lives should they be caught alive.

by **xsanguine** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:35 pm

xsanguine wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Nigel or anyone, let me ask you 2 simple questions. See if you can come up with a convincing answer to #2.

Can we all agree that these people broke at least 10 and probably closer to 20 or 30 existing laws?

If you can agree to that why on earth do you think passing another law regarding guns is going to do anything at all to prevent this type of killing?

And really, only one of those laws should be needed to put those people away for the rest of their lives should they be caught alive.

Your Weekly Mass Shooting - Page 11 Sigh-of-the-day-angry-racist-trolls-believe-we-should-boycott-the-force-awakens-becaus-669816

by Guest Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:45 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Nigel or anyone, let me ask you 2 simple questions. See if you can come up with a convincing answer to #2.

Can we all agree that these people broke at least 10 and probably closer to 20 or 30 existing laws?

If you can agree to that why on earth do you think passing another law regarding guns is going to do anything at all to prevent this type of killing?

People speed on highways a lot. Like, all the time. If you wanted to stop speeding, you wouldn't put in more laws about speeding, it wouldn't work. You would put more cops on the highway to actually catch people breaking the law before some speeder murders 14 people.

I'm not sure what my point is. I just thought of those words.

Your point would seem to be more enforcement of existing laws, which is a reasonable position. In fact though this may scar you in Bob's eyes it's one of the prime positions of .....the NRA.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:53 pm

LooseGoose wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

People speed on highways a lot. Like, all the time. If you wanted to stop speeding, you wouldn't put in more laws about speeding, it wouldn't work. You would put more cops on the highway to actually catch people breaking the law before some speeder murders 14 people.

I'm not sure what my point is. I just thought of those words.

Your point would seem to be more enforcement of existing laws, which is a reasonable position. In fact though this may scar you in Bob's eyes it's one of the prime positions of .....the NRA.

I'd like to know what 20 laws were broken and how they weren't enforced before I go too nuts with that. Which is something that I have no doubt bob would support if there really are laws out there that could have been effective in stopping anyone from losing their right to live.

I'm guessing that when you say 20 laws at least 17 of them are going to prove to not be preventative steps.

by Guest Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:59 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Your point would seem to be more enforcement of existing laws, which is a reasonable position. In fact though this may scar you in Bob's eyes it's one of the prime positions of .....the NRA.

I'd like to know what 20 laws were broken and how they weren't enforced before I go too nuts with that. Which is something that I have no doubt bob would support if there really are laws out there that could have been effective in stopping anyone from losing their right to live.

I'm guessing that when you say 20 laws at least 17 of them are going to prove to not be preventative steps.

Aren't all laws meant to prevent crime by establishing a punishment?

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:03 pm

LooseGoose wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

I'd like to know what 20 laws were broken and how they weren't enforced before I go too nuts with that. Which is something that I have no doubt bob would support if there really are laws out there that could have been effective in stopping anyone from losing their right to live.

I'm guessing that when you say 20 laws at least 17 of them are going to prove to not be preventative steps.

Aren't all laws meant to prevent crime by establishing a punishment?

What are the laws that you just referenced goose? You can't continue this conversation any further without providing a comprehensive list, otherwise we're just jerking each other off.

If you post in reply to this without providing me with a list of the laws then I'm only going to reply with a fat topless man.

by **NigelUno** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:05 pm

LooseGoose wrote:Nigel or anyone, let me ask you 2 simple questions. See if you can come up with a convincing answer to #2.

Can we all agree that these people broke at least 10 and probably closer to 20 or 30 existing laws?

If you can agree to that why on earth do you think passing another law regarding guns is going to do anything at all to prevent this type of killing?

1. You didn't answer the questions I posed to you a few pages back.
B. I believe they used some type of assault rifle(s). Would preventing people from owning assault rifles be a great infringement on anyone's rights? Or would this be an an infringement of rights so great that the founding fathers would cringe?

by Guest Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:09 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Aren't all laws meant to prevent crime by establishing a punishment?

What are the laws that you just referenced goose? You can't continue this conversation any further without providing a comprehensive list, otherwise we're just jerking each other off.

If you post in reply to this without providing me with a list of the laws then I'm only going to reply with a fat topless man.

Like this or worse?

Your Weekly Mass Shooting - Page 11 UvZHGKOh

Honestly? I'm just dartboarding how many laws they broke - I know it has to be a ton though.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:11 pm

LooseGoose wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

What are the laws that you just referenced goose? You can't continue this conversation any further without providing a comprehensive list, otherwise we're just jerking each other off.

If you post in reply to this without providing me with a list of the laws then I'm only going to reply with a fat topless man.

Like this or worse?

Honestly? I'm just dartboarding how many laws they broke - I know it has to be a ton though.

Until we know which ones the it's sort of pointless to even discuss that.

I was going to go with this. Still will.

Your Weekly Mass Shooting - Page 11 Ewk4P

Your Weekly Mass Shooting - Page 11 Ewk4P

by **tTy** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:13 pm

They prolly obeyed all laws Trav. Solid filibuster tho.

by Guest Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:14 pm

NigelUno wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Nigel or anyone, let me ask you 2 simple questions. See if you can come up with a convincing answer to #2.

Can we all agree that these people broke at least 10 and probably closer to 20 or 30 existing laws?

If you can agree to that why on earth do you think passing another law regarding guns is going to do anything at all to prevent this type of killing?
1. You didn't answer the questions I posed to you a few pages back.
B. I believe they used some type of assault rifle(s). Would preventing people from owning assault rifles be a great infringement on anyone's rights? Or would this be an an infringement of rights so great that the founding fathers would cringe?

You obviously don't read any answers so why bother.

Let me try one more time in CAPS.

What most people consider "ASSAULT WEAPONS" ARE LESS LETHAL THAN STANDARD ISSUE HUNTING GUNS. HAD THESE PEOPLE USED A 30-.06 MORE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE DIED.

I would MUCH rather be shot with an "assault rifle" than a 30-30, my chances of surviving would be significantly higher.

So would you PLEASE drop the big mean lethal assault rifle crap?

PS I used 30-.06 and 30-30 there because those are the 2 most popular/traditional hunting calibers.

by **tTy** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:17 pm

lol @ "Assault rifle!!!!!"

"non-assault rifles" are sooooo much nicer.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:22 pm

tTy wrote:They prolly obeyed all laws Trav. Solid filibuster tho.

Well we know they broke that murder one.

But beyond that, we don't really know at this point. So it's kinda dumb to say "oh they broke 10 or maybe 20 or maybe 30 laws that we just aren't enforcing!" if you don't even know what those laws are. Do they exist? Did they break any? Are the enforceable? Is that just a made up lie? We don't know.

by **tTy** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:26 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
tTy wrote:They prolly obeyed all laws Trav. Solid filibuster tho.

Well we know they broke that murder one.

But beyond that, we don't really know at this point. So it's kinda dumb to say "oh they broke 10 or maybe 20 or maybe 30 laws that we just aren't enforcing!" if you don't even know what those laws are. Do they exist? Did they break any? Are the enforceable? Is that just a made up lie? We don't know.

I'll just go with that murder one then. That seems like enough evidence to me that these fuckers don't give a flying fuck that = "laws".........

by **Travis of the Cosmos** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:29 pm

tTy wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Well we know they broke that murder one.

But beyond that, we don't really know at this point. So it's kinda dumb to say "oh they broke 10 or maybe 20 or maybe 30 laws that we just aren't enforcing!" if you don't even know what those laws are. Do they exist? Did they break any? Are the enforceable? Is that just a made up lie? We don't know.

I'll just go with that murder one then. That seems like enough evidence to me that these fuckers don't give a flying fuck that = "laws".........

Well that's nice, but you can't exactly stop the murder from happening if all you're going to do is try to enforce the "you aren't allowed to murder" law after someone breaks it.

Looking for what law they broke that we possibly could have done a better job of enforcing that could have stopped it in advance. Goose implied it exists on the books already.

by **Turtleneck** Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:30 pm

xsanguine wrote:
Turtleneck wrote:

Cowards shoot hogs from helicopters. I would not mind if that guy fell out of the helicopter and became dinner for some wild hogs.

They should certainly have the freedom to hunt dishonorably.

.

I do not believe in arbitrary authority/exercising dominion simply because you have the capabilities to do so.

by Guest Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:34 pm

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
tTy wrote:

I'll just go with that murder one then. That seems like enough evidence to me that these fuckers don't give a flying fuck that = "laws".........

Well that's nice, but you can't exactly stop the murder from happening if all you're going to do is try to enforce the "you aren't allowed to murder" law after someone breaks it.

Looking for what law they broke that we possibly could have done a better job of enforcing that could have stopped it in advance. Goose implied it exists on the books already.

I think you misunderstood my point. My point is that they were willing to break many existing laws. Based on that why would you believe they would obey new laws?

by Sponsored content