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

[saphojunkie]

Originally Posted by KCTitus

Maybe we have a differing understanding of common sense...common sense does not allow for two diametrically opposing views. One is correct and one is not.

Of course it does. You just think common sense means "a universal truth that is irrefutable in any sense by anyone ever."

There is no such thing.

And by the way, the gun laws of a massive nation with 300+ million citizens are way too ****ing complex to be dictated by "common sense." they have to be debated, poked, prodded, tested, revised, and amended.

I think it's common sense that women should have been able to vote, but apparently not. they needed forty years to figure that out. And even then - still debated.

[saphojunkie]

Originally Posted by KCTitus

You dont think NYT editorializes, then I give you same...

I never said that. It editorializes...in the editorial section.

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

Actually, it's harder to drive a car legally than buy a gun, so this argument is kind of reeruned. I mean, you have to at least pass a test to drive a car. and you are required to insure the car. And there are several safety laws governing HOW you drive a car, when you drive a car, and where you drive a car.

1) there is no 'right' to drive a car, it is a privilege...(hence the test & insurance)..so your argument is the reeruned one......

2) your suggestion that there are not laws on how, when, where you shoot guns is equally ****ing gay

3) **** your whore mouth for not actually addressing my original statement.

[Raiderhater]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

I actually meant, "does it seem reasonable for me to feel that way, even though I'm not sure we can do anything about it?"

Not, "does that level of gun control seem reasonable."

In all honesty, and not trying to be mean JMHO, it sounds miseducated and misguided for you to think that way. As I have previously stated, there is nothing any where close to sense in this position. It is completely void of logic. The ONLY people gun control affects is the people it shouldn't.

[KCTitus]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

Of course it does. You just think common sense means "a universal truth that is irrefutable in any sense by anyone ever."

There is no such thing.

And by the way, the gun laws of a massive nation with 300+ million citizens are way too ****ing complex to be dictated by "common sense." they have to be debated, poked, prodded, tested, revised, and amended.

I think it's common sense that women should have been able to vote, but apparently not. they needed forty years to figure that out. And even then - still debated.

Lets not drift into the weeds of silliness...lets talk common sense. Like, criminals will not obey gun laws. Common sense. Like, you cannot spend more than you make. Common sense. Simple things are common sense. One doesnt give up their freedom in the name of safety.

[A Salt Weapon]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

And by the way, the gun laws of a massive nation with 300+ million citizens are way too ****ing complex to be dictated by "common sense." they have to be debated, poked, prodded, tested, revised, and amended.

No actually they don't. We have a cultural problem not a gun problem. The only gun law needed was written into the 2nd amendment with the words, "shall not be infringed." The period is there for a reason, you'll notice they didn't add except for this and that reasons.

While you might think guns are scary, it is your choice to not own one. I think gay anal sex is scary, therefore I choose not to participate, I don't however attempt to affect your choice to.
Posted via Mobile Device

[KCTitus]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

I never said that. It editorializes...in the editorial section.

Everything written comes from a point of view...nothing in the NYT or Washington Post or Washington Times is unbiased. Welcome to real world.

[LiveSteam]

So "Bug Out Bags" are the hot new Christmas gift this year, hotter than Elmo some years back

[MahiMike]

I think Whitlock is missing the point. The report is that Belcher and his gf went to a concert the night before. I'm guessing it was a hip-hop concert.

We need stricter hip-hop laws.

[LiveSteam]

Up next gun control on the ORiley factor

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

From where do you get your news?

A variety of sources. I listen to the local newsradio station (WBBM) in the morning and while I'm driving, but mainly just for weather and the traffic. Their reporting is deeply liberal-biased. I've just learned to laugh it off for the most part, although I'll change the station pretty quick if they start dangling off Jesse Jackson's nuts, which mercifully doesn't happen all that much any more. A good example of this is how they love to talk up these ****tarded gun turn-in drives. Because, you know, it makes the streets safer when law abiding citizens disarm themselves. Do you think you get many gang-bangers turning in their illegally-purchased fully-automatic weapons because they suddenly found Jesus? I'm thinking not.

In fact, a smart criminal would stake the place out, wait for some well-dressed reerun in a nice car to turn in his guns, then follow the guy home and rob him blind. That's so obvious that there's no way it doesn't happen. Of course, I'm sure it wouldn't make it into the 10 minute loop between traffic/weather segments.

For serious news, I check out various sites, some conservative leaning, some more moderate. I'm not a Foxtard, if that's what you're getting at. I rarely watch it.

[A Salt Weapon]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

So "Bug Out Bags" are the hot new Christmas gift this year, hotter than Elmo some years back

I recommend Erblestock (or however they spell it).
Posted via Mobile Device

[saphojunkie]

Originally Posted by Raiderhader

In all honesty, and not trying to be mean JMHO, it sounds miseducated and misguided for you to think that way. As I have previously stated, there is nothing any where close to sense in this position. It is completely void of logic. The ONLY people gun control affects is the people it shouldn't.

You might be right. There's clearly no way we can actually get rid of all the guns at this point, so maybe it really does just exacerbate the problem. I wish I knew how to prevent some asshole from stockpiling weapons and killing 40 people at a mall or park or concert, but I don't.

[HonestChieffan]

Originally Posted by A Salt Weapon

I recommend Erblestock (or however they spell it).
Posted via Mobile Device

Dont shortchange Badlands....they make some great bags and packs

[saphojunkie]

Originally Posted by KCTitus

Everything written comes from a point of view...nothing in the NYT or Washington Post or Washington Times is unbiased. Welcome to real world.

Of course, because news isn't written by machines. But for in depth, credible, reliable, daily news, there is no better institution for it in the world than the New York Times. It's as good as newspapers get.

oh, and most of those aggregate news sites get at least the source material, if not the entire article, from the New York Times. Their reporting feeds the entire national newspaper cycle.