All Women Hate Guns
Guns are awesome. In fact, a gun is the manliest thing there is.
I take that back. The manliest thing there is would be a hot car or some kind of super motorcycle with guns attached to it. In that case, it’s a case of chicken and egg. Is the car manlier because of the guns or are the guns manlier because of the car? What about a tank? Where does it play into this manly game?
Wherever the fuck it wants. It’s a tank.
All men like guns and think they’re the greatest thing that has ever happened to man-humanity. Did you know that without guns 99% of people would be slaves? Guns ended slavery and that’s 100% true.
Before the invention of the gun, mankind lived in a feudal society. I have seen the film Braveheart many times and I become more and more certain each time I see it that feudal life was fucked. You can thank guns for the end of that dicketry.
As a man, it is only natural you thank things for what they’ve done for you. If you were a woman, you would have to figure out some way to have sex with the invention of the gun. That’s the only way women show their gratitude: lackluster sex.
Oh wait, I’m just kidding because all women hate guns and would never thank them.
Like most everything that’s good for them, women hate guns. It could be because they’re loud. Women hate loud things don’t they? Things like fun parties, and football games, and little yappy, worthless dogs that give them an excuse to refer to themselves as “mommy” about six years too soon. No, that can’t be it. Maybe women hate guns because they’re complicated — guns mind you. Not women. Women are as simple broken vending machines. No matter what you put into them, you don’t get anything you want.
Guns have moving parts and require care-taking. Recently, I heard a female comedian say vaginas are complicated though, so that’s probably not the reason. I could hear her saying it crystal clear too because no one was laughing.
The truth is that women enjoy being in danger. That’s why they hate guns. Guns are safe so women hate them. It’s logic. Without guns you, me, and everyone in the world would be on constant alert for the Hun Alarm that would jolt us out of bed in the middle of the night and let us eloquently know our whole town was about to get burned to the goddamn ground.
Thank guns and thank your man military that doesn’t happen.
That’s also why women love safety belts so much. Safety belts are dangerous just like guns aren’t. They make women drive like chimpanzees on speed with absolutely no regard for anyone’s personal safety. Have you ever seen a woman drive without a safety belt? No. And you’ve never seen a woman drive worth a shit.
I rest my case.
Related Articles:
October 13th, 2006 at 5:21 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
@Luka yeah you messed up in reading, /bonk you, but in fairness to you, I phrased that whole post clumsily. Heck I misspelled Monroe and I wrote in considerable haste. The idea is worth discussion somewhere, perhaps on my blog. Thanks for correcting yourself. Best, -w.
I’m not sure what to say in response to this. I suppose an ahistorical arrogant American could say this… but surely not someone in Europe? Simply look at the 20th century!
With the greatest of respect, that is a stunningly ahistorical statement. Look at our Civil War. Look at all we’ve been though as a country!
Shrug. You’re welcome to your views. Civil War veterans were alive in my parents’ time. That matters. And the powerful impact of the term “Yankee” remains today. The idea that all that has disappeared down the memory hole is stunningly arrogant.
This seems important to you, so I’m quoting it and responding. (Note that you often fail to do the same). Please see below for my response.
And that’s rather sad. You’re saying it’s all about your own nation, and not freedom. Fair enough.
Romania was in a hellish place. I’m not sure I buy your defense of her combined with your attacks. One or the other must logically buckle.
You cannot logically claim America is evil/wrong in a situation with limited choices and claim your country is perfect/good when faced with similar limited choices. The fact that America has more power doesn’t mean her choices are greater.
Impossible now. Could happen towards the middle of this century, but not if Chinese debts matter. Yes, that points to American weakness, but not American territorial weakness; quite the reverse, curiously.
You did well; I could not have done so without access to dictionaries or digital translation. I read French (and some other languages), and I can speak French (and no other languages), but I cannot say I am adept.
Cool beans. I lack. I use a plain-jane US keyboard since everything crashes slightly less.
I don’t know… it could be what you said about the US and its government? But maybe I’m just imagining things. I must be…
No, no, I don’t think that’s what he was about. His remarks were quite elegant and accurate, and little to do with Godwin’s Law.
Sure, ok. Well, if you really equate America to North Korea, morally, then there is no point continuing discussion. Can you please verify your views on this matter?
I’ll be the first to criticize my beloved nation when she’s wrong; I’ll be the first to defend her when she’s right.
Regards,
-wolfe
October 13th, 2006 at 5:26 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
And that’s deeply socialistic crap. Land is mostly privately owned (or, in my country, owned by tribes). To spare? That’s stupid as a formulation. Sorry, I don’t know how else to phrase it. You’re decidedly not a stupid man, but the formulation you choose is both stupid and offensive. Almost womanly.
-wolfe
October 13th, 2006 at 6:07 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I, at least, expect the US to alleviate the situation. Not NK. One cannot expect sanity, let alone reason, wisdom, amiability or even human decency from those people. Not to negate their being human, though. It’s perhaps only the plenipotentiary regime that is patently evil.
I expect the US to treat the situation wisely and earnestly.
I wish the US had ruled out any military intervention, that is not directly provoked, whatsoever from the very beginning of the talks. I wish that at least now the US woudl.
At least until it has been ascertained, beyond any unreasonable doubt, that the NKs don’t have the bomb operational and that the test failed critical point of fission incipit with only the HEs detonating - dud. I’ve heard it said so on CNN. At least that’s my understanding.
Then, by all means. Feel free to up the ante. Preferably in intimidating rhetoric and pompous displays of military muscle alone. Not yet another war. Don’t jump the gun with yet another war. There are more than enough in the world as it is.
No disrespect intended whatsoever but it seems our definitions of living memory are distinctly disparate. Are there Americans alive today that were around in 1865, even if only just born on the very last day of that very year?
You seem on a mission with this, as with the gun culture discussion. Just as I, no less. But please do toss away what irascibility you have gained from partaking of my comments and remember the ignitable nature of the medium we’re communicating in and the separate cultures we belong to as well as the age gap.
As such allow for what written words alone cannot convey and don’t flame me from every angle.
No, I do not equate Bush junior with What’s His Name. Evidently, neither do I the US with NK, except in the potential nuclear holocaust they seemingly both have the power to usher in and the responsibility they both share or should share, as such.
Certainly, you are not suggesting I’m siding with the olive nut wrapped in gold foil medals down to the crotch. Let alone look up to him for a . re you?
Perhaps better mediation by the Chinese would do the trick. Maybe they need coaxing to be more persuading in their own warnings to the NK, not let the US proffer threats of sanctions and iterate disbanding of nuclear arsenal demands alone.
October 13th, 2006 at 6:19 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
And that’s deeply socialistic crap. Land is mostly privately owned (or, in my country, owned by tribes). To spare? That’s stupid as a formulation. Sorry, I don’t know how else to phrase it. You’re decidedly not a stupid man, but the formulation you choose is both stupid and offensive. Almost womanly.
-wolfe
How gallant we are with other’s people land, nay?
Socialistic? You are disparagingly judgemental about Romania’s selfish wants of self-preservation in the WW second. Yet the instant the tables are turned…
Do you think the Huns or the Soviets gave a rat’s ass about privately owned land?
Americans would be a lot less libertarian and a lot more nationalistic and supportive of their government if they’d have experiences of national own sovereignty and suzerainty being infringed and territorial integrity compromised the way Romania has experienced throughout its entire turbulent past.
How disparaging of the turmoil inflicted upon our national being as the repelling of the Trianon treaty, a lone example among many.
Also, a civil war is not tantamount to an aggressor’s invasion. Though it is far more tragic, indeed. Please don’t equate the two.
Regards.
October 13th, 2006 at 6:26 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Sony, I think you deeply, deeply misjudge me and America. I’ve the utmost respect for you and your country.
I don’t think you remotely grasp my nation’s pain. I’m not going to go there unless I’m pushed, but I caution you… you’re treading on irrational, womanly ground.
All I can say is that I believe you’re wrong about me and mine, and invite other international people to weigh in on the debate.
Best, and God Bless Romania (And America), for she surely merits it.
-wolfe
October 13th, 2006 at 6:28 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
If we’re going to resort to profferating malicious insults then I suggest we end this discussion right now.
Though I may have insulted myself, this was not my ultimate goal. More than likely I am ignorant of some finer points of history or I worded my diatribes hastily, whatever.
I apologise for the aggravation caused.
Regards.
October 13th, 2006 at 6:30 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Indeed. I apologise. I shall take more time in answering next time.
Regards.
October 13th, 2006 at 6:33 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
In retrospect, I should have more respectfully formulated my comments. Beginning with the very one that Big Al reacted to.
October 13th, 2006 at 8:43 pm - IP Man-Hash: ecf72d58bf105
*sigh* Ditto.
October 14th, 2006 at 10:55 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I beg to differ on all three of those assertions.
You’d have no reason to and the latter though, Female. Were they addressed to you. Which they aren’t.
October 17th, 2006 at 1:33 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Are Americans causality challenged when their beloved gun toting culture is the culprit? Utterly disconcerting. What insanely brazen audacity.
Almost on par with their showing up for a conference days after Columbine claiming blissful ignorance. One would be excused for believing these truly are Godless people.
Good thing it’s not happening here.
An armed society is a polite society?
I think not. In fact, I believe it’s an abominable and insulting contention towards those societies that still value human life.
If only those that live by the sword died by the sword…
October 17th, 2006 at 2:20 pm - IP Man-Hash: 12ba2642e47bb
Sonyad, are you advocating for the death of all 300,000,000 Americans, straight after going on about my lack of respect for the sanctity of just one human life, in the forums? Surely not.
October 17th, 2006 at 3:31 pm - IP Man-Hash: e27a58d08d37a
As long as schools are crippled in their ability to maintain good orderly discipline(neccessary for learning, no?) by hands off liberalism and political correctness, no amount of gun control will stop school massacres from happening.
The only thing gun control would ensure is that instead of the bullies being shot up with bullets, is the entire school is leveled by explosives.
It’s not the low end of the IQ scale where these shooters dwell, and explosives isn’t rocket science. Look at Iraq.
October 17th, 2006 at 3:59 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
No, no they haven’t an absolute right to that. It depends on circumstance and the property in question and other factors. It’s relative. Just like the No Penal Inquiry self defence clause. Otherwise we’d have people running amok shooting their hardware then candidly claiming having felt genuinely threatened - after having done away with the witnesses, of course. Ooops.
You felt like buying a gun, you deal with it until you can find some buy back offer from a federally licensed dealer - which should only be able to buy it back after checking with ATF database, or firearm registry or whatever the fuck it’s called to see that the gun hasn’t been used in crime - or donate it to law enforcement - which should be legally obliged to take in all weapons willingly forfeited by legal owners and destroy the weapons subsequent checking for their being free of use in crime.
Proceeding otherwise should carry penal consequences of varying degrees of severity according to any, if at all, subsequent crimes committed with the firearm negligently disposed of by the legal owner. From a slap on the wrist fine to incarceration for complicity to commit… or facilitating….
You do not ‘lend’ a firearm to anyone. Next of kin or spouse’s kin.
You do not begift anyone with a firearm. Next of kin or spouse’s kin.
You do not sell a firearm to anyone. Next of kin or spouse’s kin. Unless you happen to be a juridical person federally licensed to sell them.
Awesome. Do it. Both. It’s what sane legislatures have done. You buy your mother fucking lethal weapon. You don’t get it from daddy, especially if you’re not of legal age. You go through the backg checks, you register, you follow all the legal guidelines. You obey the (what ought to be) fucking law, or people die. It’s that bloody simple.
But that’s far more convenient for the people that matter, isn’t it? You know, it really doesn’t matter that you’re not officially NRA in exchange for remuneration. With your views on this and, what you deem to be arguments there for, you ought to be on their board of directors. Heck, it’s only fair. Female claims not to be a feminist.
Please don’t insult my intelligence.
Please don’t insult my intelligence or my morality. Wolfe, I feel compelled to doubt your sobriety at time of writing that. Can you see any reason in that flaw? I can’t.
Of course. The only reason I didn’t mention it was because I thought it patently obvious. Apparently, it’s not.
Don’t be silly. Stretched out non sequitur. Totally unrelated straw man. For shame. I don’t know what’s more disconcerting. Your equating and linking private sale of firearms with private sale of books, even if they are sometimes coincidently retailed together together, or your flagrant disregard for public safety.
Another straw man. Feeble comparison. Equating melee weapons with potent projectile weapons. Ranging from .50 AE Deagles to .50 BMG Barett. Please don’t insult my intelligence or knowledge I posses, be it meagre.
One does not outrun a bullet.
One does not fend off a bullet.
One does not avoid a bullet.
One hopes 7.62*39 rounds won’t pass through the tree. But they do.
I have no idea where you get your number citations from. Anyway. Involved in crime is one thing. How about used in killing/maiming?
That would make for marginally few lives saved each year. Terribly sorry to so awkwardly inconvenience you for a few hundred people a year, kind sir. It must be so much trouble to buy from a federally licensed dealer.
However, what are lives saved? Can you count them? Point them out? Guess not. Why not make it so that they can be counted, is your argument perhaps? Unfortunately, there are plenty of them to count each passing year.
Not that federally licensed dealers are any better, though. The NRA is working hard to make them legally completelly inexpugnable through unassailable burden of proof and severely wanting reprimands that allow them to keep operating abysmally in the wrong, even after court rulings as such.
For shame. A first year logician could have done better than that.
So you need a receipt atesting the purchase value of the firearm and you yourself need to resell at or bellow said value at a gun show or through newspaper ads? What if there’s no receipt? Is there anyone even checking? Aren’t there any sold without receipts? I don’t know what to make of this statement.
Not nearly narrow enough.
I somehow beg to differ on that. To the extent of being diametrically oposed.
It’s actually you with the shutters on the eyelids. Selective or plain ignorance, you’ve exhibited it before, in the midst of our historical chat.
I myself believe the martians have finally entirely made off with chucky’s heston puny brain.
Actually, it’s the NRA doing all the special interest legislation. At the exponse of innocent people’s lives. Those pesky shutters again…
Oh, that favourite retort of yours. Anyone who doesn’t agree with you on everything - including being irrational - is at least partly irrational.
I’m not about to go through that hefty pdf. You are mischieviously misconstruing my argument against private sale of firearms and illegal sales as somehow being against all firearms, even the legally purchased.
Nvertheless, I’ll humour you. Just off the top of my head, mind you.
1. Being able to see at least as well as you are required to for a driver’s license. As in not being blind as a bat, no disrespect intended. Ponder the fact that people failing this criteria at time of application are known to have been legally issued CCW permits, no less. Let alone having purchased a firearm.
2. Legally certified formerly insane. Have purchased guns and decerebrated coworkers and/or committed suicide.
3. Have stated their plans to use the firearms to break the law.
If needs be I’ll look up the specific cases link to them. I’d rather not be bothered to, that you take me on my word.
What’s even the point of all the paperwork if daddy’s gonna let junior play with his mac-90?
Actually, the burden of proof still stands with you. My concession was merely one out of a genuine wish for closing upon objectiveness on the issue.
Guess you learn new stuff everyday. Even if it is pure poppycock.
OH!!! You meant legally. How crassly dim of me. So instead of having a handful of firearms caused deaths - most if not all of inbetween criminal elements of society - except for the odd nutcase that shot his family with his service pistol after returning from Afghanistan or the other nut that shot 2 pharmacists with a supressed pistol and those 2 instances involving nuts that shot people with their 12 gauge hunting shotguns - a year, let’s have a whole bunch of them, like in the US!
Hell, let’s have a roaming turkey shoot!
Sensible legislation? Are you mocking me? Either our definitions of sensible are distinctly disparate, which is likely actually, or I can name 10 either inane or patently evil bills that passed into law for each plus 1 of your sensible ones. It wouldn’t matter though. You’d just tweak the definition of sensible or ignore my statements completely, or pull some flaming straw men like you did thus far.
FYI, I’ve already touched on a few pieces of ’sensible’ legislation the NRA sponsored. You made like it was raining.
No, it’s not. And you know it. It’s just so much easier to construct an ad hominem attack. I’ve no issue with guns by themselves. None at all. In fact, I find their technology fascinating, at times and in cases.
Especially the imaginative way by which their fulfillment of function could be improved towards bettering their performance for specific goals. Like accuracy,
Remember our discussion in the forum, about the physics of projectile weapons? My humbly submitted ideas for improvement, etc.?
It’s exactly people getting into the mix that bothers me. How is that animism? I’ve no issue with any gun, so long as no one has access to it, except at a range or deep into the woods, for example. Who gives a fuck about idiots shooting each other whilst out hunting anyway?
You are perfectly entitled to your own subjective assessment of the situation. Their pervasive psychological influence is so subtly insidious that most, if not all, people in question are at pains to admit it, once hooked.
Can you go a full week completely without watching tv or reading the newspapers? Or a full year without firearms at all? 6 months? 3 months? 1 month?
Of this I have no doubt. But the potential is there. Your very carrying the firearm inescapably implies your willingness, acceptance to kill another human being - bears don’t run amok everywhere that you carry, do they?; you wouldn’t use a 9mm or .45 acp chambered against a bear anyway, would you - precludes any reason for it.
And it’s not the gun that repels. It’s the person carrying. I’d be hard pressed to give you a grudging time of day if I met you down the street, unawares of your identity, knowing you carry.
You need to understand. It’s not the people that don’t possess or own firearms or that loath seeing them carried - to put it mildly and politely - that are the deviants.
I find trigger policemen or holster sad cops repugnant as well. And the Greek police’s policy when pulling someone over, be them even an unarmed woman on a Vespa? Utterly disturbing, to say the least.
Neither have I heard shots fired or people shot to death stretched stone cold on the pavement. But that’s probably because I don’t live in America.
Nevertheless, that stadium full of dead people each year continues to prosper.
Please do not bring ‘89 into this. That would be beneath you.
Bollocks. Iraq? Afghanistan? Uganda? America?
It’s not just people with guns that kill people. But it’s mostly people with guns.
Regards.
October 17th, 2006 at 4:10 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
No abridging to subsets at first hurdle to avoid invalidation, now. The way you usually quote it is without restricting the hypothesis to the anglosphere.
Actually, if you’d restrict it to null, you’d be correct.
October 17th, 2006 at 4:26 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Palestine even. I think there’s hardly a household without a full auto capable 7.62*39 rifle.
Give a person (fire)power, they will likely not abuse it. Perhaps. But the odds dwindle enormously that no one will when guns are as prolific and aboundant as well as easily accessible/obtainable in a society as they are in America.
Power corrupts man. And angels too. That is the nature of power. Only God has power uncorruptable.
The only reason a definitive nuclear holocaust has not yet commenced is because nuclear weapons are nowhere near as prolific and accessible as Dakota would like. The odds are there waiting, for future generations to explore and indulge in.
Because the sins of the father shall be visited upon the sons.
Florida’s “stand your ground” bill.
October 17th, 2006 at 4:27 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
And another bill.
October 17th, 2006 at 5:07 pm - IP Man-Hash: 6897e3ddf8ad0
Shut the fuck up, Female.
-Dick
October 17th, 2006 at 9:37 pm - IP Man-Hash: 5475964f1d333
How rude.
October 18th, 2006 at 4:08 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
This may come as a shock to you, Female, but no. I’m not.
It would be nice if ballistics were discriminatory, though. As in bullets killing or maiming only their intended targets, not little children blocks away, playing unawares in their home.
And only if they’re armed and/or present real, immediate, intended grave physical harm to someone, not something. Or whatever our dimwitted definition of an instance of justifiable homicide is. And if bullets didn’t ever fly through whatever they were originally meant to hit on to some innocent bystander, possibly even unarmed, in line of sight. Etc.
And if crazed marksmen using stolen rifles, not noticed to have been stolen by the dealer, would only hunt at NRA conventions, not an entire state having people afraid to go to a gas station without hiding behind a shroud encompassing the premises. Such a dealer should be put out of business, don’t you concur? Immediately, not in 60 days, not needing God almighty to come down from Heavens Himself and demand it.
And the NRA’s bill for exempting the industry and dealership against almost any civil liability flies in the face of those people. Not to mention it’s also backwards applicable, meaning it also halts all legal proceedings pending. The most pampered industry and trade in the country… Behold the grace of special interest legislation at work.
You know the one. Monkey boy made it into law last year, I think. I even wrote and linked to articles on it.
Why don’t you go save 10000 wolves, Female? I’m sure they’ll appreciate it.