Go to hell whitlock.

[A Salt Weapon]

Yes I am a noob here, but after hearing that whitlock just blamed Belcher and his girlfriends death on lack of more restrictive gun laws.
You are a true classless piece of shit, using this incident to push your anti-bill of rights agenda, **** you.
Posted via Mobile Device

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

Yeah you need to find a link before you guestimate with a $40 BILLION margin of error.

I put in that margin because it depends on what source and more importantly what YEAR. It obviously fluctuates. But what's funny is my point remains. Your statement was a lie. You could use a 100 BILLION dollar margin of error and your statement would still be false.

FACT: California receives AT LEAST 25 times the money Alaska receives from the Feds. That's gonna be true for any year you pick out of a hat. Most years it 30 times or above.

Now, it's fair for California to receive more because they have a much larger population... but it is also completely UNFAIR to judge Alaska on a per capita basis when they have 4X the land mass of California and God knows how much more Federal land as a percentage of that.

It is a ridiculously stupid garbage NY Times talking point.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

Here's the article he references about Alaska being a paradox:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/19/bu...ulus.html?_r=0

I know the articles and again, it's just dumb. Quoting stupidity doesn't help your point.

[saphojunkie]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I put in that margin because it depends on what source and more importantly what YEAR. It obviously fluctuates. But what's funny is my point remains. Your statement was a lie. You could use a 100 BILLION dollar margin of error and your statement would still be false.

FACT: California receives AT LEAST 25 times the money Alaska receives from the Feds. That's gonna be true for any year you pick out of a hat. Most years it 30 times or above.

Now, it's fair for California to receive more because they have a much larger population... but it is also completely UNFAIR to judge Alaska on a per capita basis when they have 4X the land mass of California and God knows how much more Federal land as a percentage of that.

It is a ridiculously stupid garbage NY Times talking point.

First of all, it was also a joke.

Secondly, I love that "NY Times" is supposed to be an insult. Like it's a commie rag being published in some basement in Kiev. It's the leading institute of journalism (and therefore fact-checking) in the entire world, bud.

[saphojunkie]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I know the articles and again, it's just dumb. Quoting stupidity doesn't help your point.

You don't "know the articles" you liar.


Like, "I'm well versed in both of these pieces. I read them daily." God, get off your high horse. I have been nothing but cordial and respectful while offering my opinions here, save one wisecrack about Alaska, and you jumped on it like a fat chick on the last slice of pizza.

Settle down. Moderate yourself, mod.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by Rausch

It's not like a football player would take the time to stab a woman to death.

Errr...

Exactly.

Like this scenario could have easily turned deadly :

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/rumors/p...?urn=nfl,67444

[Raiderhater]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

Well, we have to assume that all firearms were either smuggled into America or purchased legally at some point. They aren't being stolen from the factory floor - not all of them.

I would just like to see the steady stream of handguns into our cities reeruned. It's just a little crazy how many guns continue to enter the market. Why not proceed with a modicum of caution?

Of course, I'm sure it won't happen. I just wanted to show people that some of us are anti-gun but not anti-gun owner. A lot of my friends have guns (of course, they're all ex-military or law enforcement or both). I ****ing love guns. Their awesome. I'm a badass shot, too. I really am. But I don't think we should have ever become a gun culture, and it makes me sad that there's no going back.

Honestly, if it weren't for my wife, I might even own a gun. But she's from Colorado and her good friend was at Columbine. If I mention buying a gun, she loses her shit. C'est la vie, we all make sacrifices in marriage.

Doesn't change the fact that guns are legal, and they're gonna stay legal. I don't like it, though. I'd infringe the shit out of your rights to keep and bear arms, if I could. I can't. There are better fights out there, anyway.

oh, and I don't think Jovan Belcher's crime has anything to do with the gun control argument. He would have stabbed her if he didn't have a gun. That's crimes of passion. My abhorrence of gun culture is the teenager who goes into a mall and mows down 25 people before offing himself. If there's a way to legislate gun control to prevent that from happening, then I'm all for it. It's really all I care about. Not some guy who gets a boner by shooting his .44 at the range. Who gives a shit about that?

I'm sorry but, as the owner of several firearms, making it more difficult for me to legally purchase a gun than it is for some hood to illegally purchase one is not pro-gun owner. And there is NOTHING you can say to convince me otherwise. There is not a shred of common sense in that position. No ifs, ands or buts about it.

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by GoChargers

"Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist #29.

BucEyedPea strongly disapproves of any mention of the Arch-Demon Hamilton.

[Raiderhater]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

First of all, it was also a joke.

Secondly, I love that "NY Times" is supposed to be an insult. Like it's a commie rag being published in some basement in Kiev. It's the leading institute of journalism (and therefore fact-checking) in the entire world, bud.

There may have been a time when that was accurate. Now that paper is one of the biggest jokes in the journalistic world. Your assumption on their fact checking is laughable. That is one of the most biased media outlets in the nation.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

First of all, it was also a joke.

Secondly, I love that "NY Times" is supposed to be an insult. Like it's a commie rag being published in some basement in Kiev. It's the leading institute of journalism (and therefore fact-checking) in the entire world, bud.

The NY Times more and more is a platform for ridiculously misleading crap like this. But let's leave the source out of the debate... it doesn't even matter if HuffPo (a truly worthless rag) published it... I'd still look at the content fairly. In this case these articles were written as purely intellectually dishonest garbage. They use per capita figures without ever explaining how misleading that can be.. especially with a state with such a huge area and such massive amounts of Federal land. So again, it's garbage "journalism" meant to attack Stevens and Palin. Neither of which I am a big fan of but I am even less of a fan of misrepresenting "facts" in a way that amounts to modern yellow journalism.

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by Laz

is A Salt Weapon another Tom Cash mult?


just wondering ...

Uh, no. Every Tom Cash mult is an annoying douche. I like this guy. Wish I lived in Alaska and had his gun collection. In fact, I should have nominated him in the n00b of the year thread, but being a forgetful old fart, it slipped my mind.

[KCTitus]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

First of all, it was also a joke.

Secondly, I love that "NY Times" is supposed to be an insult. Like it's a commie rag being published in some basement in Kiev. It's the leading institute of journalism (and therefore fact-checking) in the entire world, bud.

Didnt get the first joke, but the second paragraph was hilarious.

[digger]

Originally Posted by frazod

.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

You don't "know the articles" you liar.


Like, "I'm well versed in both of these pieces. I read them daily." God, get off your high horse. I have been nothing but cordial and respectful while offering my opinions here, save one wisecrack about Alaska, and you jumped on it like a fat chick on the last slice of pizza.

Settle down. Moderate yourself, mod.

Ok, **** off you piece of shit, I read both articles when they came out as well a few others saying the same garbage as far back as 2008.

Some of us read, quite a bit.

Care to retract your "liar" comment now?

[saphojunkie]

Originally Posted by Raiderhader

I'm sorry but, as the owner of several firearms, making it more difficult for me to legally purchase a gun than it is for some hood to illegally purchase one is not pro-gun owner. And there is NOTHING you can say to convince me otherwise. There is not a shred of common sense in that position. No ifs, ands or buts about it.

In all honesty... probably not. I'm no expert on gun control laws, as I'm sure most of you are more than ready to tell me.

I would love to find a solution and frankly I don't think anything I've offered up really counts. But I do think that the first step towards finding one is admitting we need one. And here we have a log jam, as gun...I don't know...enthusiasts?...refuse to acknowledge that handguns and gun violence are a real thing and an actual problem that needs to be addressed.

They aren't the most important topic, it's not the most pressing topic, but the way it is now I just don't think is conducive to the safest, healthiest society possible. How do we get there? I have no idea, which is why I don't fight for gun control laws. But I do believe that some measure of gun control is necessary.

Does that seem reasonable at all?

[A Salt Weapon]

I hate Ted Stevens as well, he was a piece of shit and I am glad he died. Our state will be better off without him, he was no conservative, he was a RINO, and for proof look to his daughter, he lost the primary here and then bribed the native corps with free land and benefits in exchange for their votes.
Posted via Mobile Device