I'm not even sure what your point is. Yeah I'd rather sleep with a dakimakura of my waifu Renge-chan than with some random 3D slut but that doesn't mean I'm desperate, it's the opposite, it implies that I have standards.
It's not just dogs, it's pitbulls. That always brings along its own drama, because the pitbull defense force (in this case, /u/kaptainklobber and /u/mindyourownbusiness3) is always on the scene.
You realize that pitbulls are pretty aggressive, right? Just because your pitbull is a good boye and won't maul anyone doesn't mean pitbulls are a breed of peace.
I'll just copy and paste the explanation I wrote for /u/ComedicSans:
It's a play off of أمير المؤمنين, a title that many Muslim leaders have given themselves through history (even now, the King of Jordan and the King of Morocco use the title, they also both claim to be descended from the Prophet Muhammad).
أمير المؤمنين (amir al-mu'mineen, the apostrophe is pronounced like the glottal sound at the end of strut or the beginning of uh-oh, it's kind of hard to explain but they say it at around 0:15 in this video) means "leader of the believers".
أمير المتوحدين (amir al-mutawaħħideen, the marked h's make a bit of a stronger sound than in English) means "leader of the autists".
I now realize that I went way too in-depth there, I guess I'm probably a bit of an autist myself.
I've worked with dogs for a while and I can honestly say pitbulls are no different from any other dog. They are naturally muscular and strong dogs which makes them more dangerous if they do attack.
The real problem with pitbulls is pitbull owners. You know the kind of guy who wants a badass pitbull guard his house. The kind of guy who wears saggy jean shorts and has a star tattoo somewhere visible. You know the type. Anyway the problem isn't with the dog, it's with the people who train their dogs for home defense, and by "train" I mean beat the shit out of the dog until it does what they want. Then when the dog flies off the handle and hurts someone people act like is the dog's fault. I have to deal with these owners all the time.
You know the kind of guy who wants a badass pitbull guard his house. The kind of guy who wears saggy jean shorts and has a star tattoo somewhere visible.
Ironically, while /r/guns doesn't support shooting pitbulls, they're all carrying guns in fear of that kind of guy.
They're not more aggressive though. As I said before that's the owners doing. They're not inherently more aggressive than other types of dogs, that's bullshit. They are very strong dogs which makes them dangerous if they do attack. And no they don't "never let go" that's more bullshit
They are bred to be aggressive. Saying a Pitbull isn't more aggressive than other breeds, is like saying a border collie isn't more energetic and enjoys to cull sheep more than other breeds.
You know there's not an actual breed called "pitbull" right? It's a name people colloquially use to refer generally to 4 different breeds
So which breeds are bred to be aggressive exactly; the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, the American Bully, or the Staffordshire Bull Terrier? Can I get a citation on any of those breeds being purposefully bred for aggression?
Can I get a citation on any of those breeds being purposefully bred for aggression?
They are talking about pitbulls on a whole. But since you didn't bother to read the links, one of them is specifically talking about the American Pitbull Terrier.
I love the fact that the American Pitbull Association has a dedicated hate page to Judge Judy because she calls them out as shit tier dogs owned by shit tier people in several episodes.
If you really want to talk about shit tier dogs talk about chihuahuas. Those shitrats are such a pain to deal with. Those fucking anklebiters just stare at you with their beady rat eyes before they shit on the carpet.
The difference is if I'm in a fight with a chihuahua I can just kick it's mongy face off with one swift kick, but if a pitbull starts on me then fuck I might as well write my will because I'm fucked by running or fighting.
Win? Sure, but they've got a nasty habit of being able to maim you too.
Just losing a single finger can seriously disadvantage you throughout life and pitbulls are capable of mangling body parts to the point of amputation, so I wouldn't even want to take my chances with a piece of shit dog like a pitbull.
So there are random large aggressive dogs just wandering the streets chasing people and they have a problem with someone defending themselves. u/mindyourownbusiness3 do you let your baby killers just wander the streets and chase people
So most pro gun people would be OK with having a gun to feel safe around humans, but having one to feel safe around aggressive dogs is somehow different?
The problem we have with her is that she is looking to illegally conceal carry a firearm to use as a first resort. She has every intention of using the firearm to shoot the first dog she sees. Not to mention other factors keeping her from legally owning a firearm
Fair enough. Where I'm from nobody's allowed to even have pepper spray, so I just wanted to understand what made her different to most american potential gun owners.
I'm from the same place as they are. We're allowed to use our teeth when giving a forceful blowjob to our attacker, but we must be mindful of the perp's jewels.
You have to file a request with the police, and they will give that person a stern look in the name of the state, because our state possesses a monopoly on the legitimate use of stern looks.
So it gets lost is a big steaming pile of bureaucracy never to see the outside world ever again. Makes the process of procure an NFA item seem not so bad
The difference is that pepper spray is just illegal to own and you can get charged just for having it. If you have a jar of hot sauce, bug spray, or whatever, and use it in a self defense situation, the most you can get charged with is actually just fighting someone(depending on how shit your laws are).
So you support restricting a fellow American's 2nd amendment rights on your judgement of their behaviour? Should I be allowed restrict your 2nd amendment rights?
Any use of marijuana by any person, in any form, for any reason, regardless of state law makes that person on the federal level a "prohibited person" from owning a firearm. It doesn't matter that CA is about to enact recreation use, it doesn't matter that we already have medical use, it doesn't matter that she has a state issued card. The ban is a federal law, one that ATF takes very seriously.
She cannot legally own a gun. Period. This has nothing to do with /r/guns views on the situation or on the law, it is the law and isn't likely to change anytime remotely soon. Personally I think it should be changed, but it isn't up to me.
On top of that she wants to carry the firearm in California, CA is a "may issue" state meaning that the issuing of a CCP (concealed carry permit) is up to the local law enforcement. In the vast majority of CA it is very hard to get a CCP, in her city of San Diego it is basically impossible. Add to the difficulty of getting one in SD of her also being but fully functioning (something that would come up in a CCP application review), she also wants to carry one for what most PD would deem a really bad reason.
CA also has no open carry.
So there is no legal way for her to buy/own a gun and no legal way for her to carry a gun while biking. And she fundamentally does not understand, and is totally unwilling to listen, to why a gun won't solve her problem anyways.
Any use of marijuana by any person, in any form, for any reason, regardless of state law makes that person on the federal level a "prohibited person" from owning a firearm.
I smoke marijuana regularly and nobody took my gun away.
k, well you just admitted to committing multiple felonies. There is a long list of people in prison that would disagree with your assessment that no one gives a shit. But it's your life, good luck.
Some of the most extreme cities and states use licenses as a way to enact a ban, issue blanket denials to anyone who isn't police or a politician. The more liberal states and cities do this with carry permits. In California, police dogs can and do get conceal carry permits easier than the rest of the citizens of the state. But not many of the residents of California have being a good doge on their state record, so there is that
You're either apparently really dense or intentionally ignorant.
Marijuana is a controlled substance under federal law, ....you use marijuana....thereby using a controlled substance under federal law.....then you signed a federal form that you clearly made a false statement on.
You are an unlawful user of marijuana, and therefore prohibited from purchasing firearms. The simple fact the ATF hasn't actively enforced the law does not change the law.
You are literally the reason weed shouldn't be legalised. Because it makes people not only retarded as fuck but also totally, insufferably self-righteous. Do the world a favour and develop a lethal heroin habit instead, faggot.
People still deal dimebags while carrying a gun despite it being common knowledge that you're fucked on another level if you get caught. Expecting people to not risk less severe consequences is asking too much.
The 2nd amendment says "shall not infringe", not "if you're high and trying to kill a house pet maybe don't". If the founding fathers didn't want us to be irresponsible as shit they would have written that in. It is every American's right to have a drug freak out and kill random dogs and it every American dog owners right to freak out and retaliate with their own preferably automatic weapon.
No matter what I say here you are probably going to try to twist my words around or out words in my mouth, and in a place where I sense I don't have the most friendly audience. But I'll give it a shot. Browsed her post history a bit, ermergerd I'm a creeeeeeep, muh privacy.
This individual already has her 2nd amendment rights restricted on the federal level because of her current marijuana use. Doesn't matter what the state law says because as long as marijuana is federally prohibited, do you can't legally have firearms and enjoy jazz cabbage.
Her past benzo addiction concerns me, but if you manager to kick a drug addiction, clean yourself up, get your shit together, then you can have your 2nd amendment rights back.
She likes to shop lift quite a bit. While not doing it at s felony level, not a great idea to have someone actively involved in criminal activity to not be able to own a firearm. Doesn't strike me as a good idea.
The intent of what she wants to do with it strikes me as irresponsible. She wants to illegally conceal carry it in a state where it near impossible to get a permit, and her state of mind makes me fear she is going to shoot the first animal that looks at her. But there is no law saying you have to be responsible, and if there was every individual would have to prove responsibility and thay could be abused and used to evoke an all out ban by just just labeling everyone as irresponsible.
The bigger question, the autism, is probably what you really want me to answer and you just read through a load of shit you don't care about to get here. Current law states of you been involuntarily committed to a mental institution or declared mentally defected, no gun for you. I'm fine with that. Basically have the cops or a doctor had you hauled off to the funny farm kicking and screaming? Or has a court of law ruled you to be mentally unfit, or a danger to yourself or others. The big muddy gray part is what qualifies as mentally unfit? No one has an absolute answer to that and that is where the big debate is right now. I've known a few autistic people who have been superb members of gun owning community. I've also known autistic people who weren't allowed to handle sharp objects. Each individual is different but there is no reasonable way to evaluate every person on an individual basis to decide who gets to own a gun and who doesn't.
Should there be restriction on the 2nd amendment rights. There already are, and there should be some, because there are people who are up to no good, or don't have the mental capacity or reasoning ability to be responsible gun owners. So do I think there should be some restrictions on the 2nd amendment? A few. Do I get to decide what they are? No. Do you get to decide what they are? Not unless you are in Congress? Could someone else have said all this shit way better and less long than me? Fuck yeah they could have.
We would call this "seriousposting" in these here parts, but as you are new here, I'll let it pass, as you seem to be otherwise enjoying your visit.
"Seriousposting" belongs in the original thread. /r/drama more for mockery then explanations, unless those explanations are to lead to further mockery. Like, maybe we're too dumb to understand the issue, but once we do we can stir the shit more effectively.
Most pro gun people are very careful about following the law in regards to firearms. The chances of her getting a license to carry a concealed weapon in CA are pretty much nil.
Most dogs can be chased off simply by being aggressive towards them, but if a dog is seriously a problem and trying to attack I'd have no problem shooting it.
Yes. Once, while riding my bike (no, really), I was surprised by a pitbull that ran up and started barking at me. I stopped my bike because I was a surprised dumbass. I yelled at the dog - "bad boy! go home!" a couple of times. It worked, and I continue to be a dumbass to this day.
Yeah because that pitbull wasn't going to attack you in the first place. Dogs bark, it's what they do. It's when they stop barking that you need to be worried
Oh, no doubt. It's uncommon for dogs to be actually aggressive towards humans. (I don't mean afraid, or territorial.) Most dogs just don't have the disposition or drive for it. It can be trained, to some extent (working dogs, Schutzhund, etc.) but most dogs really aren't suited for that.
There are several differences from typical concealed carry rationale:
1) OP would always be on what is considered a roadworthy vehicle in most states. Plus she bikes for exercise, not as a mode of transit.
2) Using a gun while on a moving bicycle is dodgy at best.
Many people can't keep it on a torso-sized target past 10 meters with a full sized handgun while STATIONARY, in a standing position, using both hands to hold the gun, on a square range with no time constraints/stress.
The most likely situation where you get legitimately chased by a dog while on a bike is where the only way to draw would be to either stop the bike (i.e letting yourself get bitten) or hastily draw and fire with one hand while not aiming from a moving bike, which would be reckless to say the least.
3) OP stated that she would stop her bike to shoot the dog.
I carry a handgun with a total of 32 rounds on my person when I leave the house, but if I were in my car when someone rushes at me with a knife, I would just drive away because you would have to be an idiot to want to intentionally be in that situation.
If she's far enough to stop/dismount her bike, draw, and get a clean shot on the dog (which is moving at least 35 kph) before it reaches her (read: dog is stopped before 2 meters), she is far enough to just bike away, because that's at least 20 meters.
4) The self-justified attitude of OP suggests that she wants to shoot the dog(s) only because they make her mildly uncomfortable. If they were a legitimate threat to her life, she would've stopped going down those routes and called animal control.
I sort of doubt OP intended to shoot from a moving bike, that sounds like madness, but honestly I skimmed some of it, so tell me I'm an idiot if I'm being an idiot.
Another question, why is your spare mag larger than your main one?
While riding a bike, there are only really two options (draw while on a moving bike, or dismount and then draw), so I dissected both to show how terrible an idea either would be.
why is your spare larger than your main one
Since my spare is mounted vertically instead of horizontally (i.e in the gun), I can carry a larger magazine without worrying about "printing" more because of it. It's mounted in a holster like this one.
Printing is when the outline of your gun/gun-related item is visible through your shirt (like the design was "printed" through the fabric).
Also because if I'm in a situation that calls for another magazine (either because of malfunction or actually using ammunition), it probably won't hurt to have another two rounds.
I do keep a round in the chamber, but I keep the magazine at standard capacity (14+1) so that I have somewhere to put the +1.
I remove my carry mag when at the range, so it's more convenient to simply put a +1 in the carry mag than to keep track of it, strip the top round off the carry mag, put the +1 in, rack, and then put the top round back in.
This might be a bit confusing to you since you've probably never handled a centerfire handgun, but basically, yes to round in chamber.
even if it's not cocked
The interesting thing about striker fired handguns is that if they are loaded, they are cocked...almost.
The way that a hammer fired gun works is that you have a spring loaded hammer that strikes a pin (the "firing pin"), which then crushes a pressure-sensitive explosive cap (the primer) that ignites the primary charge and fires the gun.
The hammer can be single-action (where the trigger only releases a previously cocked hammer), double-action (where the trigger raises a hammer to full cock and then releases it), or some variation of those two.
What I carry is what's called "striker fired". A "striker" is a firing pin assembly that takes out the middle man; the firing pin itself is spring loaded (exactly like a center punch), and the trigger directly acts on the firing pin assembly to release the spring tension and propel the pin into the primer.
However, the striker is not at its full compression. It is 98% cocked. The reason for this is because modern handguns have a firing pin block, which (aptly) blocks the firing pin when the trigger is not pulled.
This is fine if you have a hammer fired gun because you can slave the firing pin block to the hammer notch and have it do the work for you, but on a striker fired gun, the trigger lever has to directly drive the firing pin block out of the way. So the last 2% is used to pull the firing pin back (away from the block) while the block moves out of place.
If these mechanics are interesting, I'd strongly recommend this training video. It's from WWII, but the principles still hold true to this day.
One in the chamber or not is a question of doctrine normally, there are reasonable arguments for both sides. Either way though, unless you are carrying a VERY old (40+ years) gun or one of disturbingly low quality, it is safe to carry with one in the chamber.
Most hammer fired guns have at least one or more safeties, such as a 1911 with it's grip safety (back of the grip, must be depressed to fire) and it's manual thumb safety (small switch on the side of the gun, has to be in the down position to fire).
Most striker fired guns have a trigger safety that requires the trigger itself to be depressed for the gun to fire.
Because of these it is totally safe to carry a gun with one in the chamber. However, some people just choose not to since there is a theoretical possibility of the gun being able to go off even with all of the safeties. Some guns have undiscovered design flaws (Sig p320, google it if you're interested), some are just very low quality and things can break, etc. These chances are very, very low but they do exist. Thus prompting some to choose to keep the chamber empty since the action of cocking a gun is something that you can train into your draw and only adds a tiny fraction of a second to it. That opens a whole new can of worms about what might go wrong though.
Personally, the very rare times I carry out of the house (my state is very limiting on when/if I can) I carry with one in the chamber. However, at home my HD weapon is kept with an empty chamber.
NATOMarksman might have more to say, he is one of the smarter people on /r/guns.
Yes, this issue was made more horrific because it was adopted by the US...Army (I think it was Army) as a new sidearm right before the massive recall over the dropping it and it going bang thing.
They fixed it since, but its kind of a gun meme now.
People didn't like the M16 when it was new, they didn't like the M9 also
Those particular choices were amplified by the fact that it was a change in both service round AND firearm.
M9
The thing about that is that a brand new 92FS/M9 is a fantastic gun; it's one of the easiest guns to field strip, trigger is great, has very good mechanical accuracy, passed the same grueling trial tests as the SIG P226 (TWICE actually, since SIG raised a stink about it and they re-ran the XM9 trials just to make sure it wasn't a fluke), and recoil is very mild.
The reason why the XM9 program existed was because 1911s were shot to shit. Some of them were shot so much that their barrels were smoothbore, and accuracy was like throwing a hot dog down a hallway. They were also often abused or neglected to the point that many of them rattled or had non-functional critical parts (like the grip safety or manual safety).
M9s have similar gripes now because they have been run into the ground too. The difference is that unlike the 1911, the M9 has part uniformity, so that they could just dunk a new slide assembly onto an old frame.
Some of these frames have seen 50k+ rounds and still work fine, unlike the 1911 frames that were made by over a dozen different WWII manufacturers with varying specifications.
1911s often had to be hand-fitted for replacements, which only balanced out because the US made so damn many of them and they were essentially free to the Cold War era US Army armorers.
This is also why I will never buy a CMP 1911 or M9. All the good 1911s went home with soldiers, and M9s were never taken home so all of them were run to the ground.
As an owner of a pitbull (and two rots) who wouldn’t harm a fly unless provoked, please don’t ever carry a gun.
I wonder if /u/mindyourownbusiness3 dogs playfully chase bicyclists as well, without any intention to harm a fly of course, seeing how that's a precondition for hypothetically getting shot by that girl. Or maybe the operative word here is "unprovoked", while bicycle sluts are clearly asking for it?
Just learn how to handle dogs, jesus... If you can't be arsed to do a simple thing like that, heed their advice and get bear mace before you shoot some innocent animal out of your pathetic fear...
Look into the Judge revolver. It's a 5 cartridge 410 and you can either do pellets (I would recommend this, easier to hit something) or slugs. Also it comes in pink.
Have you considered that pitbulls might be following you because of the way that you smell? I would recommend taking showers everyday. Then, the pitbulls should stop chasing you as the scent of beef tallow should be slightly diminished.
If you're retarded enough to come up with an idea like this and autistic enough that dozens of people telling you it's stupid doesn't get through to you, maybe you're better off just not leaving the house.
Except Pitbulls were specifically created/bred to be fighting dogs. It's what they're inclined towards. Just like Border Collies are super hyper because they were bred to be herding animals.
In the 90's, pitbulls accounted for something like 2/3 of all dog related fatalities. Its only gone down because people have learned to not own them.
Nobody gives a shit if a chihuaha or a beagle is a dick. Worst case, you get a nasty bite and then you punt that damn thing away. But a pitbull who is a dick can straight up kill people.
I really don't give a shit about what percentage of dogs killed a measly ~400 people over the course of 10 years in a country with a population of 300m. S T A T I S T I C A L L Y I N S I G N I F I C A N T
After pits the next in line will just have a "larger part of the pie" when you omit something in a ratio or percentage. Both numbers would still be too little to give a damn about.
An example I always love to use: are you a good experienced driver? If you are, im sure you always wear a seatbelt, cause you know that not everything is in your control. Same with Dogs, you have to treat them carefully cause you never know what can happen.
Don't let your big dog run freely, some kid/drunk asshole/idiot might molest them and there will be nothing you can do after that
/u/mindyourownbusiness3 if you let your dogs run in the streets they deserve to get shot. It's your fault for being a shitty owner. Get a fence or a leash. Otherwise, don't own dogs.
I like the one poster who equates aggressive dogs with aggressive Basketball Americans, to show that discrimination based on breed is not ok for humans or dogs.
From /r/Guns (don't worry, not doing any voting, thas a bad maymay and reddit don't like dat.)
OP is not legal to own a firearm as a user of marijuana.
OP also does not present the right mindset for owning and carrying a firearm (In which the firearm is to ONLY be used as a last resort).
OP also seems to think if she shoots a dog, there's no legal repercussions on her whatsoever, and that it's her right to ride down the road shooting any dog that looks at her funny.
Again, that doesn't matter. If you buy a gun you won't be asked if you have the right mindset to own a gun. As if a FFL dealer is going to ask you "Hey, are you going to shot up dogs with this gun? If so, I can't sell it to you. Also please take this psychological evaluation, so that I can see that you aren't batshit crazy."
1) You have to take a CCW class to get the permit to carry concealed. In that class, she would have to hide the fact that she is in fact not a bloodthirsty maniac for three hours while being talked to and having to participate in a group setting, something she is incapable of because she is not only suffering from autism, but clearly has resentment for people who live in rural areas who make less money than her.
2) Brick and mortar gun dealers have strong incentives not to sell firearms to antisocial unempathetic morons. They can deny sale for any reason. They almost always ask questions in casual conversation to judge the persons state of mind or experience with firearms. They have no shortage of buyers, they don’t need to deal with this woman. She is a headache.
Hey, if the church shooter in Texas could hold it together and purchase a gun, so can this chick. She should just tell the FFL dealer that there are coyotes roaming around in the neighborhood and she fears for the safety of her nieces a nephews she watches.
He shouldn’t have been able to get a gun in the first place, considering the nature of his armed forces discharge and domestic violence charges. In that case whoever was selling the gun didn’t do their basic fucking job. Personally I wouldn’t have sold him a gun because anyone that ugly can’t be up to any good.
That wasn't really the fault of the FFL selling the gun. All they do is make a phone call and wait for a proceed/deny/delay. It's the military's fault for not reporting it and getting him blacklisted on the NICS system.
I didn't say there were 1/50, I said if you show me one, I'll show you fifty opposites. On average CCW holders commit less crime and wrongful shootings than our own police officers.
It sounds rediculous, but you have to remember, your average civilian has more time to train with their firearms than police officers are. It's a general rule that your average hunter and recreational shooters are more accurate and
You need to be autistic to find ways to enforce all those obscure rules in a way that allows you to jam up legal gun owners to the max. The passion for dog killing is just icing on the cake.
My opinion is that she's retarded and needs to become un-retarded before handling a firearm, not that she shouldn't own a gun period. The ATF, however, doesn't agree, being as she's a pothead, their Opinion (which matters a whoooole lot more than mine) is that she can't own one, period.
Yeah most concealed carry people, are in my opinion, really just scientists and scholars. Like, never seen a 350 pound man in line at mcdonalds with a .22 on his hip and though "good christ, how did they become so woke?"
If you want the 2nd to be protected you should be asking California to be removing their unconstitutional laws about not being able to own firearms if you use marijuana.
Ya...about that...Sen. Feinstein is the bitch that has never met a gun control bill she didn't like, has authored almost all of them in the past 25+ years, doesn't know what a buttstock is, and thinks that a rifle with a pistol grip makes it super mega deadly.
We're basically just totally fucked out here in the great state of Cali.
I'm confused and probably dumb. As long as you've never been charged with anything marijuana related you're fine, right? It isn't like they piss test you when you get a background check is it?
From what I can tell the autism levels are roughly equal but you r/guns people aren't bussyblasted enough to provide quality drama so I say get the fuck out
From /r/Guns (don't worry, not doing any voting, thas a bad maymay and reddit don't like dat.)
Actually us voting in your linked thread would be considered against reddit rules, you can do whatever the fuck you want in the linking thread. Also this is /r/Drama, it's almost entirely unmoderated. Shit your pants and post a picture of it if you like. Or don't, you do you.
This isn’t technically correct about weed. You can be a user of it, in legal states which California technically is for users prior to the first of January when the first temporary permits are licensed for legal sales- she just can’t be in possession of it without looking at federal charging. That said, a weird part of the law here in WA reveals that if you’re a legal cannabis license business license holder, which I am, I can own a personal firearm. However, my employees cannot while also in possession of cannabis. It’s very weird. I had a long convo with our enforcement agent at the LCB about it a few weeks ago. I don’t totally get it.
Form 4473 says no, even if your state has legalized it, and it will remain that way until marijuana is deregulated and legalized. The state has no say.
Just letting you know what our government tells us. Honestly the state has been our only controlling entity- the feds have shown zero interest in what we’re doing at all. They explicitly give firearm possession rights to license holders for protection. Like I said, I don’t get it. But the issue in the prior comment has more to do with the physical ownership of both cannabis and guns- using it but not having any on you wouldn’t factor in. That’s all I was getting at.
I'm just telling you as a former gun dealer, with friends who buy guns in Cali, it's still illegal, federally, and as such it's a felony to lie on that form even in California.
I'm just telling you as a former gun dealer, with friends who buy guns in Cali, it's still illegal, federally, and as such it's a felony to lie on that form even in California.
OP is not legal to own a firearm as a user of marijuana.
Even as someone who believes that gun ownership should be heavily restricted, I think this is a stupid law. I don't think people who are currently high should be carrying firearms, but I din't think drug use should prevent legal gun ownership.
Oh, I agree, there are legitimate reasons to use marijuana and it's unconstitutional that the ATF is allowed to take this stance, but it's hard enough to fight for our own rights (as gun owners), we can't do the fighting for the potheads too.
The SRD thread seems pretty chill so far. Theres only one guy sperging a bit about "muh altrights" and everyone else is enjoying the popcorn. I wonder if they finally cleaned the place out.
No it isn’t disqualifying you ignorant redneck moron. I have a super high IQ you white trash fuck. Autism is a neurological condition you stupid stupid motherfuckers who upvoted that several times.
Evil and stupid. I understand why most educated people are against you fuckfaces owning weapons.
Imo, give her a gun. A pitbull gets shot (good!) And a autistic women gets beat to death by an angry Mexican family (better!) Who then go to court and get off due causing another large drama thread ab9ut illegal aliens (Best!)
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaactually, many states ban batons and some states, like mine will require you have a concealed weapons permit in order to carry one. Same for brass knuckles. Yes I know they it to you as a "paper weight," but try explaining to a law enforcement official why your paper weight is a set of brass knuckles
Jfc, looking at her posting history it's clear that she needs to stay away from guns. Clueless but think she knows everything (even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary; i.e. it is against federal law to own a gun if using marijuana, even "legally"), serious social aggression problems and mental issues beyond that, at least some delusion. Oh and that nagging "neurological disorder" that she tells everyone she has and then gets mad when people bring it up.
While you can have philosophical difference with r/guns, it's hard to deny that they were far more knowledgeable on guns, laws, and demeanor, and she just started calling everyone redneck morons when they laid the law out for her to read. It's scary to think there are these untrained, ignorant people out there that /r/guns is begging not to get a gun, but so full of themselves they refuse to consider it.
We get many post by people who definitely do not need to own guns. Like posts from suicidal people, people intending to cause harm to others, people looking to break laws, mental issues, and a whole host of various kinds of nope. We give them an answer and it's not the answer they wante to hear so they all get fanny troubled in response and suddenly we are all no nothings
That's gun ownership in the US in a nutshell. Doing your thing, following the rules, and constantly being shit on by people who are completely ignorant of how things really are.
Pretty sure a best litmus test of wether or not you should own a gun is when the entirety of the most pro 2A subreddit there is says "nah, maybe you specifically shouldn't own one.
even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary; i.e. it is against federal law to own a gun if using marijuana, even "legally"
Every time someone brings that up (and I see /r/guns posters go on about it all the time) I just think about that weird homeschooled kid in the after school activities who thought you were going to get arrested for smoking a cigarette. Like, do people actually think that's a big deal? What weird fucking twilight zone do you live in where the feds are care about gun owners smoking weed? I assume everyone who talks about that is from some conservative bible belt state where the cops arrest you for smoking pot and they've convinced themselves that feds are like that too. Do you also think the feds are going to start raiding the dispensaries?
I know it sucks to know I’m not actually retarded and have a higher IQ than all of you. Where is your superiority then? I’m sorry you are mostly inbred lowlife rednecks trapped somewhere in middle America. I know you are angry and want someone to blame.
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Rick and Morty. The humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the jokes will go over a typical viewer’s head. There’s also Rick’s nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Narodnaya Volya literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these jokes, to realise that they’re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Rick & Morty truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the humour in Rick’s existential catchphrase “Wubba Lubba Dub Dub,” which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev’s Russian epic Fathers and Sons. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Dan Harmon’s genius wit unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools.. how I pity them. 😂
And yes, by the way, i DO have a Rick & Morty tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid 😎
The only thing on my mind while going through her post history was that picture shadman drew of that autistic girl with a gun in her mouth with a sign that said “PLEASE BE PATIENT IM AUTISTIC” lol
434 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2017-12-03
I'm not even sure what your point is. Yeah I'd rather sleep with a dakimakura of my waifu Renge-chan than with some random 3D slut but that doesn't mean I'm desperate, it's the opposite, it implies that I have standards.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Tomoko is best girl though
1 shallowm 2017-12-03
It's not just dogs, it's pitbulls. That always brings along its own drama, because the pitbull defense force (in this case, /u/kaptainklobber and /u/mindyourownbusiness3) is always on the scene.
You realize that pitbulls are pretty aggressive, right? Just because your pitbull is a good boye and won't maul anyone doesn't mean pitbulls are a breed of peace.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-03
What does your flair mean??? :p
1 yamsjustyams 2017-12-03
"Prince of the Autistic"
1 shallowm 2017-12-03
I'll just copy and paste the explanation I wrote for /u/ComedicSans:
1 Dasand_rudestorm 2017-12-03
Wow man, thats pretty autistic. I love it.
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-03
Holy shit that's amazing! Hahahaha
1 SuperObviousShill 2017-12-03
Anyone who takes that title is a passive homosexual. You know this to be true.
1 shallowm 2017-12-03
imply shia aren't kuffar and their opinions have any validity
1 SuperObviousShill 2017-12-03
sunni practice shirk by elevating bussy to the same level as allah.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
I've worked with dogs for a while and I can honestly say pitbulls are no different from any other dog. They are naturally muscular and strong dogs which makes them more dangerous if they do attack.
The real problem with pitbulls is pitbull owners. You know the kind of guy who wants a badass pitbull guard his house. The kind of guy who wears saggy jean shorts and has a star tattoo somewhere visible. You know the type. Anyway the problem isn't with the dog, it's with the people who train their dogs for home defense, and by "train" I mean beat the shit out of the dog until it does what they want. Then when the dog flies off the handle and hurts someone people act like is the dog's fault. I have to deal with these owners all the time.
1 IAintThatGuy 2017-12-03
Ironically, while /r/guns doesn't support shooting pitbulls, they're all carrying guns in fear of that kind of guy.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Actually I carry a gun for the scary merged out white dudes.
1 alexmikli 2017-12-03
I also own a boat just in case the government comes after me.
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
I think k that's the same dude.
1 lokiriver 2017-12-03
wut
1 IAintThatGuy 2017-12-03
Gun owners would gladly shoot the dog's owner than the dog. Especially shoot the kind of person who stereotypically owns a pitbull.
1 lokiriver 2017-12-03
Your stereotyping a stereotype
1 hakkzpets 2017-12-03
Pitbulls have been bred to be aggressive and never let go of their bite.
There is a problem with pitbulls.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
They're not more aggressive though. As I said before that's the owners doing. They're not inherently more aggressive than other types of dogs, that's bullshit. They are very strong dogs which makes them dangerous if they do attack. And no they don't "never let go" that's more bullshit
1 hakkzpets 2017-12-03
They are bred to be aggressive. Saying a Pitbull isn't more aggressive than other breeds, is like saying a border collie isn't more energetic and enjoys to cull sheep more than other breeds.
1 Denny_Craine 2017-12-03
You know there's not an actual breed called "pitbull" right? It's a name people colloquially use to refer generally to 4 different breeds
So which breeds are bred to be aggressive exactly; the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, the American Bully, or the Staffordshire Bull Terrier? Can I get a citation on any of those breeds being purposefully bred for aggression?
1 hakkzpets 2017-12-03
https://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-statements/position-statement-pit-bulls
https://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pit-bull-faq.php
http://time.com/2891180/kfc-and-the-pit-bull-attack-of-a-little-girl/
http://www.dogtemperament.com/pitbull-temperament-aggressive/
http://www.dogtemperament.com/the-9-most-aggressive-dog-breeds/
1 Denny_Craine 2017-12-03
None of those specified which breed you're actually referring to because once again "pitbull" isn't a breed
1 hakkzpets 2017-12-03
They are talking about pitbulls on a whole. But since you didn't bother to read the links, one of them is specifically talking about the American Pitbull Terrier.
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
Pitbulls are actually bred to be human-dog. It's other pitbulls they hate.
1 grungebot5000 2017-12-03
they’re not the MOST aggressive, but they’re definitely more aggro on average than goldens
1 Re_LE_Vant_UN 2017-12-03
Quit beating around the bush and just say niggers.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Well yeah it is mostly black guys
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
Hey, white trash is also an issue
1 Che_Gueporna 2017-12-03
Those two statements are inherent contradictory.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
No they're not retard.
Pitbulls are not any more aggressive than other dog breeds
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-03
I love the fact that the American Pitbull Association has a dedicated hate page to Judge Judy because she calls them out as shit tier dogs owned by shit tier people in several episodes.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
If you really want to talk about shit tier dogs talk about chihuahuas. Those shitrats are such a pain to deal with. Those fucking anklebiters just stare at you with their beady rat eyes before they shit on the carpet.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-03
Chihuahuas, spics of the dog world.
And I agree, they should be gassed.
1 shanewater 2017-12-03
The difference is if I'm in a fight with a chihuahua I can just kick it's mongy face off with one swift kick, but if a pitbull starts on me then fuck I might as well write my will because I'm fucked by running or fighting.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
lol what? Pitbulls aren't big dogs. They're tough yeah but any reasonably fit man should be able to win against a pit bull
1 gumbenzoin 2017-12-03
you underestimate how strong animals are
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Nah, I don't. I work with dogs every day.
1 gumbenzoin 2017-12-03
i didn't work with dogs but i did use to work with animals
i really dont think the average person could beat a pitbull without some sort of weapon. or if they could it would be a pretty pyrrhic victory
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
I said "most reasonably fit men" , not "the average person"
Comn guy don't move the goalposts that's what SRDines do.
1 gumbenzoin 2017-12-03
those terms are the same thing to me
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Well they're not.
Should we continue this discussion here or should I just warp into your preferred reality?
1 gumbenzoin 2017-12-03
either one works
1 cheers_grills 2017-12-03
Fuck you
1 Pinksters 2017-12-03
Ftfy.
1 Che_Gueporna 2017-12-03
http://blog.dogsbite.org/2017/02/quincy-man-dies-after-dog-attack.html
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Lol he "accidentally" smacked the dog against the wall hard enough to leave a blood trail.
Another abused dog being blamed for shitty owners
1 Che_Gueporna 2017-12-03
What does that have to do with this conversation.
Your claim is that a pitbull can't kill a "reasonable fit man". Killed a 21 year old dude just fine.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Yeah, because the dude had a fucking seizure. Are you retarded?
1 withmorten 2017-12-03
He's posting in /r/drama ...
1 shanewater 2017-12-03
Win? Sure, but they've got a nasty habit of being able to maim you too.
Just losing a single finger can seriously disadvantage you throughout life and pitbulls are capable of mangling body parts to the point of amputation, so I wouldn't even want to take my chances with a piece of shit dog like a pitbull.
1 Coltonhoover 2017-12-03
Just get your own pit bull to defend yourself. The only way to stop bad people with dogs are good people with dogs
1 dsclouse117 2017-12-03
Pitbulls are 15% of dogs but commit 63% of the bites!!!
1 geraldodelrivero 2017-12-03
We need to seriously consider a pitbull genocide.
1 boyoyoyoyong 2017-12-03
So there are random large aggressive dogs just wandering the streets chasing people and they have a problem with someone defending themselves. u/mindyourownbusiness3 do you let your baby killers just wander the streets and chase people
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Aggressive dogs in the streets? The solution must be to put a gun in some sperggies hand and let her rip like a beyblade
1 TrailerParkBride 2017-12-03
Omnicide now
1 yourmumsanargonian 2017-12-03
Did you just assume my breed /u/kaptainklobber?
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
So most pro gun people would be OK with having a gun to feel safe around humans, but having one to feel safe around aggressive dogs is somehow different?
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
The problem we have with her is that she is looking to illegally conceal carry a firearm to use as a first resort. She has every intention of using the firearm to shoot the first dog she sees. Not to mention other factors keeping her from legally owning a firearm
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Fair enough. Where I'm from nobody's allowed to even have pepper spray, so I just wanted to understand what made her different to most american potential gun owners.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Not even pepper spray? Sweet jesus, are you allowed to even give someone a stern look?
1 starship_litterbox 2017-12-03
I'm from the same place as they are. We're allowed to use our teeth when giving a forceful blowjob to our attacker, but we must be mindful of the perp's jewels.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
I don't know where this is, but it doesn't sound like a place it would go to get a blow jobs
1 ZZZ_ZERO_ZZZ 2017-12-03
Cucked commiefornia
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
You have to file a request with the police, and they will give that person a stern look in the name of the state, because our state possesses a monopoly on the legitimate use of stern looks.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
What's the wait time to get an approval/denial on your request for stern looks
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Depends if there are any strikes.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
So it gets lost is a big steaming pile of bureaucracy never to see the outside world ever again. Makes the process of procure an NFA item seem not so bad
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
France?
I'm guessing based on what my French bosses told me about their gun laws, not just throwing shade due to the stereotype.
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Brexitland
1 GnomeChumpski 2017-12-03
Pack a vial of battery acid then.
1 hitlerallyliteral 2017-12-03
the only way to stop a bad guy with a tub of acid is a good guy with a tub of acid
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Jesus Christ. You should be lynching your politicians in the street
1 dsclouse117 2017-12-03
They would but those chose this level of control over their lives. They can even be arrested for an insensitive tweet apparently.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
He doesn't sound too stoked
1 alexmikli 2017-12-03
If you want pepper spray in an area that bans it, get bear spray or one of those stupidly strong bug sprays. Usually they aren't covered.
Now if your country has no self defense laws you're probably hosed anyway but at least you won't be raped or stabbed.
1 hakkzpets 2017-12-03
I'm pretty sure there is no country out there without self-defence laws. Perhaps Somaliland, but that place has few laws to begin with.
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Pretty sure anything carrying any chemical spray with the intent to use it as a weapon is illegal.
1 alexmikli 2017-12-03
The difference is that pepper spray is just illegal to own and you can get charged just for having it. If you have a jar of hot sauce, bug spray, or whatever, and use it in a self defense situation, the most you can get charged with is actually just fighting someone(depending on how shit your laws are).
1 Hemingwavy 2017-12-03
So you support restricting a fellow American's 2nd amendment rights on your judgement of their behaviour? Should I be allowed restrict your 2nd amendment rights?
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
That isn't what is happening.
Any use of marijuana by any person, in any form, for any reason, regardless of state law makes that person on the federal level a "prohibited person" from owning a firearm. It doesn't matter that CA is about to enact recreation use, it doesn't matter that we already have medical use, it doesn't matter that she has a state issued card. The ban is a federal law, one that ATF takes very seriously.
She cannot legally own a gun. Period. This has nothing to do with /r/guns views on the situation or on the law, it is the law and isn't likely to change anytime remotely soon. Personally I think it should be changed, but it isn't up to me.
On top of that she wants to carry the firearm in California, CA is a "may issue" state meaning that the issuing of a CCP (concealed carry permit) is up to the local law enforcement. In the vast majority of CA it is very hard to get a CCP, in her city of San Diego it is basically impossible. Add to the difficulty of getting one in SD of her also being but fully functioning (something that would come up in a CCP application review), she also wants to carry one for what most PD would deem a really bad reason.
CA also has no open carry.
So there is no legal way for her to buy/own a gun and no legal way for her to carry a gun while biking. And she fundamentally does not understand, and is totally unwilling to listen, to why a gun won't solve her problem anyways.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
I smoke marijuana regularly and nobody took my gun away.
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
k, well you just admitted to committing multiple felonies. There is a long list of people in prison that would disagree with your assessment that no one gives a shit. But it's your life, good luck.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Yeah. I called the ATF and explained my situation to them. They called me a moron for wasting their time and hung up.
1 Trajan_ 2017-12-03
Prime example of loss of intelligence due to Marijuana usage.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
I just follow the advice of my grandpa.
"Better be stupid and have guns, than to be smart and get shot by the government!"
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
"Guns don't kill people, the government does" - Dale Gribble
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
That's why owning a gun shouldn't even require a license.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Some of the most extreme cities and states use licenses as a way to enact a ban, issue blanket denials to anyone who isn't police or a politician. The more liberal states and cities do this with carry permits. In California, police dogs can and do get conceal carry permits easier than the rest of the citizens of the state. But not many of the residents of California have being a good doge on their state record, so there is that
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Which is all bullshit. Nowhere does it say in the constitution that I need a "license" to own a gun.
1 Catcac 2017-12-03
No where does it state you don’t.
1 lascanto 2017-12-03
Yeah fuck those californians. they should move back to mexico where they came from
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
It was mexico before it was California. Easier to just give it back to Mexico
1 jaredschaffer27 2017-12-03
It doesn't in the good states.
1 Chromebookbitches 2017-12-03
You sound like an even more retarded version of Homer.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
If I'm the retarded version of Homer, then are you the commie version of Lisa?
1 Chromebookbitches 2017-12-03
Lisa is already pretty "commie" by today's internet children standards, but I'd consider myself more of a groundskeeper willie kind of guy.
1 froibo 2017-12-03
That's the same advice Grampa Kemper gave to his grandson before he shot him with his own gun.
1 Prime67 2017-12-03
And how exactly did you answer 11e o the 4473?.....
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
I'm not an unlawful user of marijuana. And I bought my guns before the "clarification" was added last year.
1 Prime67 2017-12-03
You're either apparently really dense or intentionally ignorant.
Marijuana is a controlled substance under federal law, ....you use marijuana....thereby using a controlled substance under federal law.....then you signed a federal form that you clearly made a false statement on.
You are an unlawful user of marijuana, and therefore prohibited from purchasing firearms. The simple fact the ATF hasn't actively enforced the law does not change the law.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
But it supports my statement that nobody gives a shit. Just ask yourself how many gun owner in Colorado are active marijuana users?
1 EarnestNoMeta 2017-12-03
This is r/drama. You can say "fucking retarded" here.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Nah man, they'll shoot your dog. Then probably lock themselves out of their car
1 RedditIsLiteralAIDS 2017-12-03
You are literally the reason weed shouldn't be legalised. Because it makes people not only retarded as fuck but also totally, insufferably self-righteous. Do the world a favour and develop a lethal heroin habit instead, faggot.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
VAPE NAYSH YALL!
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Depends on what state you're in
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Do you really think that even in states where marijuana is not legal you're being asked if you smoke marijuana before purchasing a gun?
1 AdvancedLuddite 2017-12-03
That exact question is on the 4473, dipshit.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Question 11E on the 4473 you fill out for every gun purchase
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
They do ask you, but you're prohibited from owning a gun and it's a felony if you get caught.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Smoking marijuana is also a federal crime, doesn't matter if it's legal in your state or not.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Ok? Doesn't change anything.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Yeah, true. Nobody gives a shit. People smoke marijuana, people will lie and fill in "No" on 11e. Nothing changes.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
At those people will still be at risk of catching multiple felonies. Not saying it's right but you've got to be a retard to risk it
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Owning a gun and having fun > owning a gun and not having fun. That's even true if you account for the risk of catching multiple felonies.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Lol hope u get caught retard
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
I will never get caught.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Yeah that's what they all say
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
It's true in my case because I'm Carmen Sandiego.
1 OscarGrey 2017-12-03
People still deal dimebags while carrying a gun despite it being common knowledge that you're fucked on another level if you get caught. Expecting people to not risk less severe consequences is asking too much.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
At least there's some logic to that. Better to be fucked legally than dead in the street
1 OscarGrey 2017-12-03
Dimebags? WTF are you talking about. In big cities maybe, but in most places you're a complete moron if you sell small amounts and carry a gun.
1 TotesMessenger 2017-12-03
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
1 Hemingwavy 2017-12-03
The 2nd amendment says "shall not infringe", not "if you're high and trying to kill a house pet maybe don't". If the founding fathers didn't want us to be irresponsible as shit they would have written that in. It is every American's right to have a drug freak out and kill random dogs and it every American dog owners right to freak out and retaliate with their own preferably automatic weapon.
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
2/10 troll attempt.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
No matter what I say here you are probably going to try to twist my words around or out words in my mouth, and in a place where I sense I don't have the most friendly audience. But I'll give it a shot. Browsed her post history a bit, ermergerd I'm a creeeeeeep, muh privacy.
This individual already has her 2nd amendment rights restricted on the federal level because of her current marijuana use. Doesn't matter what the state law says because as long as marijuana is federally prohibited, do you can't legally have firearms and enjoy jazz cabbage.
Her past benzo addiction concerns me, but if you manager to kick a drug addiction, clean yourself up, get your shit together, then you can have your 2nd amendment rights back.
She likes to shop lift quite a bit. While not doing it at s felony level, not a great idea to have someone actively involved in criminal activity to not be able to own a firearm. Doesn't strike me as a good idea.
The intent of what she wants to do with it strikes me as irresponsible. She wants to illegally conceal carry it in a state where it near impossible to get a permit, and her state of mind makes me fear she is going to shoot the first animal that looks at her. But there is no law saying you have to be responsible, and if there was every individual would have to prove responsibility and thay could be abused and used to evoke an all out ban by just just labeling everyone as irresponsible.
The bigger question, the autism, is probably what you really want me to answer and you just read through a load of shit you don't care about to get here. Current law states of you been involuntarily committed to a mental institution or declared mentally defected, no gun for you. I'm fine with that. Basically have the cops or a doctor had you hauled off to the funny farm kicking and screaming? Or has a court of law ruled you to be mentally unfit, or a danger to yourself or others. The big muddy gray part is what qualifies as mentally unfit? No one has an absolute answer to that and that is where the big debate is right now. I've known a few autistic people who have been superb members of gun owning community. I've also known autistic people who weren't allowed to handle sharp objects. Each individual is different but there is no reasonable way to evaluate every person on an individual basis to decide who gets to own a gun and who doesn't.
Should there be restriction on the 2nd amendment rights. There already are, and there should be some, because there are people who are up to no good, or don't have the mental capacity or reasoning ability to be responsible gun owners. So do I think there should be some restrictions on the 2nd amendment? A few. Do I get to decide what they are? No. Do you get to decide what they are? Not unless you are in Congress? Could someone else have said all this shit way better and less long than me? Fuck yeah they could have.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I love you niggins.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
People love me for more than my counter shitpost kpop shitposting
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I love all your pervs and edges.
1 toynbeeidea16 2017-12-03
We would call this "seriousposting" in these here parts, but as you are new here, I'll let it pass, as you seem to be otherwise enjoying your visit.
"Seriousposting" belongs in the original thread. /r/drama more for mockery then explanations, unless those explanations are to lead to further mockery. Like, maybe we're too dumb to understand the issue, but once we do we can stir the shit more effectively.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
I knew I should have included memes and kpop idols and pictures of my daki
1 Brother_To_Wolves 2017-12-03
Well said.
1 Hemingwavy 2017-12-03
Just because you support the death of the 2nd amendment with a thousand paper cuts doesn't mean it has no friends at /r/drama.
The 2nd amendment says "shall not infringe", not "if you're high and trying to kill a house pet maybe don't".
1 hosford42 2017-12-03
Upvoted for being the only fair treatment of autism I've seen here.
1 cigr 2017-12-03
Most pro gun people are very careful about following the law in regards to firearms. The chances of her getting a license to carry a concealed weapon in CA are pretty much nil.
Most dogs can be chased off simply by being aggressive towards them, but if a dog is seriously a problem and trying to attack I'd have no problem shooting it.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
You ever try acting aggressively to a pitbull?
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2017-12-03
Seriously. I'm a pretty big dude but I wouldn't want to fight a pitbull. A young woman could get killed.
1 zeropistons 2017-12-03
Yes. Once, while riding my bike (no, really), I was surprised by a pitbull that ran up and started barking at me. I stopped my bike because I was a surprised dumbass. I yelled at the dog - "bad boy! go home!" a couple of times. It worked, and I continue to be a dumbass to this day.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Yeah because that pitbull wasn't going to attack you in the first place. Dogs bark, it's what they do. It's when they stop barking that you need to be worried
1 zeropistons 2017-12-03
Oh, no doubt. It's uncommon for dogs to be actually aggressive towards humans. (I don't mean afraid, or territorial.) Most dogs just don't have the disposition or drive for it. It can be trained, to some extent (working dogs, Schutzhund, etc.) but most dogs really aren't suited for that.
1 NATOMarksman 2017-12-03
There are several differences from typical concealed carry rationale:
1) OP would always be on what is considered a roadworthy vehicle in most states. Plus she bikes for exercise, not as a mode of transit.
2) Using a gun while on a moving bicycle is dodgy at best.
Many people can't keep it on a torso-sized target past 10 meters with a full sized handgun while STATIONARY, in a standing position, using both hands to hold the gun, on a square range with no time constraints/stress.
The most likely situation where you get legitimately chased by a dog while on a bike is where the only way to draw would be to either stop the bike (i.e letting yourself get bitten) or hastily draw and fire with one hand while not aiming from a moving bike, which would be reckless to say the least.
3) OP stated that she would stop her bike to shoot the dog.
I carry a handgun with a total of 32 rounds on my person when I leave the house, but if I were in my car when someone rushes at me with a knife, I would just drive away because you would have to be an idiot to want to intentionally be in that situation.
If she's far enough to stop/dismount her bike, draw, and get a clean shot on the dog (which is moving at least 35 kph) before it reaches her (read: dog is stopped before 2 meters), she is far enough to just bike away, because that's at least 20 meters.
4) The self-justified attitude of OP suggests that she wants to shoot the dog(s) only because they make her mildly uncomfortable. If they were a legitimate threat to her life, she would've stopped going down those routes and called animal control.
TL;DR
OP was dumb.
1 Pepperglue 2017-12-03
A nice rundown on the issues. OP truly is a retard.
u/Eeffss, you should totally get a gun. Then come back to reddit and cry how it didn't work as you wanted.
1 Brother_To_Wolves 2017-12-03
Before or after her prison sentence?
1 Pepperglue 2017-12-03
Before, and probably some one subs like legaladvise.
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Thanks for such an in-depth answer.
I sort of doubt OP intended to shoot from a moving bike, that sounds like madness, but honestly I skimmed some of it, so tell me I'm an idiot if I'm being an idiot.
Another question, why is your spare mag larger than your main one?
1 NATOMarksman 2017-12-03
While riding a bike, there are only really two options (draw while on a moving bike, or dismount and then draw), so I dissected both to show how terrible an idea either would be.
Since my spare is mounted vertically instead of horizontally (i.e in the gun), I can carry a larger magazine without worrying about "printing" more because of it. It's mounted in a holster like this one.
Printing is when the outline of your gun/gun-related item is visible through your shirt (like the design was "printed" through the fabric).
Also because if I'm in a situation that calls for another magazine (either because of malfunction or actually using ammunition), it probably won't hurt to have another two rounds.
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Very interesting, and do you keep a round in the chamber for extra capacity or is this a big no even if it's not cocked?
1 NATOMarksman 2017-12-03
I do keep a round in the chamber, but I keep the magazine at standard capacity (14+1) so that I have somewhere to put the +1.
I remove my carry mag when at the range, so it's more convenient to simply put a +1 in the carry mag than to keep track of it, strip the top round off the carry mag, put the +1 in, rack, and then put the top round back in.
This might be a bit confusing to you since you've probably never handled a centerfire handgun, but basically, yes to round in chamber.
The interesting thing about striker fired handguns is that if they are loaded, they are cocked...almost.
The way that a hammer fired gun works is that you have a spring loaded hammer that strikes a pin (the "firing pin"), which then crushes a pressure-sensitive explosive cap (the primer) that ignites the primary charge and fires the gun.
The hammer can be single-action (where the trigger only releases a previously cocked hammer), double-action (where the trigger raises a hammer to full cock and then releases it), or some variation of those two.
What I carry is what's called "striker fired". A "striker" is a firing pin assembly that takes out the middle man; the firing pin itself is spring loaded (exactly like a center punch), and the trigger directly acts on the firing pin assembly to release the spring tension and propel the pin into the primer.
However, the striker is not at its full compression. It is 98% cocked. The reason for this is because modern handguns have a firing pin block, which (aptly) blocks the firing pin when the trigger is not pulled.
This is fine if you have a hammer fired gun because you can slave the firing pin block to the hammer notch and have it do the work for you, but on a striker fired gun, the trigger lever has to directly drive the firing pin block out of the way. So the last 2% is used to pull the firing pin back (away from the block) while the block moves out of place.
If these mechanics are interesting, I'd strongly recommend this training video. It's from WWII, but the principles still hold true to this day.
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
One in the chamber or not is a question of doctrine normally, there are reasonable arguments for both sides. Either way though, unless you are carrying a VERY old (40+ years) gun or one of disturbingly low quality, it is safe to carry with one in the chamber.
Most hammer fired guns have at least one or more safeties, such as a 1911 with it's grip safety (back of the grip, must be depressed to fire) and it's manual thumb safety (small switch on the side of the gun, has to be in the down position to fire).
Most striker fired guns have a trigger safety that requires the trigger itself to be depressed for the gun to fire.
Because of these it is totally safe to carry a gun with one in the chamber. However, some people just choose not to since there is a theoretical possibility of the gun being able to go off even with all of the safeties. Some guns have undiscovered design flaws (Sig p320, google it if you're interested), some are just very low quality and things can break, etc. These chances are very, very low but they do exist. Thus prompting some to choose to keep the chamber empty since the action of cocking a gun is something that you can train into your draw and only adds a tiny fraction of a second to it. That opens a whole new can of worms about what might go wrong though.
Personally, the very rare times I carry out of the house (my state is very limiting on when/if I can) I carry with one in the chamber. However, at home my HD weapon is kept with an empty chamber.
NATOMarksman might have more to say, he is one of the smarter people on /r/guns.
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Is this the one that could be dropped on the back of the slide and fire?
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
Yes, this issue was made more horrific because it was adopted by the US...Army (I think it was Army) as a new sidearm right before the massive recall over the dropping it and it going bang thing.
They fixed it since, but its kind of a gun meme now.
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
iirc basically any new US Army firearm becomes very controversial. People didn't like the M16 when it was new, they didn't like the M9 also.
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
OG M16 had major issues because the Army is run by dipshits, so people hating on it back then was very much for good reason.
M9 is different, that was more people reacting to a major shift in doctrine.
But yes, in general people are going to bitch about change no matter what. And when their bitching has merit, it becomes a whole new monster.
1 NATOMarksman 2017-12-03
Those particular choices were amplified by the fact that it was a change in both service round AND firearm.
The thing about that is that a brand new 92FS/M9 is a fantastic gun; it's one of the easiest guns to field strip, trigger is great, has very good mechanical accuracy, passed the same grueling trial tests as the SIG P226 (TWICE actually, since SIG raised a stink about it and they re-ran the XM9 trials just to make sure it wasn't a fluke), and recoil is very mild.
The reason why the XM9 program existed was because 1911s were shot to shit. Some of them were shot so much that their barrels were smoothbore, and accuracy was like throwing a hot dog down a hallway. They were also often abused or neglected to the point that many of them rattled or had non-functional critical parts (like the grip safety or manual safety).
M9s have similar gripes now because they have been run into the ground too. The difference is that unlike the 1911, the M9 has part uniformity, so that they could just dunk a new slide assembly onto an old frame.
Some of these frames have seen 50k+ rounds and still work fine, unlike the 1911 frames that were made by over a dozen different WWII manufacturers with varying specifications.
1911s often had to be hand-fitted for replacements, which only balanced out because the US made so damn many of them and they were essentially free to the Cold War era US Army armorers.
This is also why I will never buy a CMP 1911 or M9. All the good 1911s went home with soldiers, and M9s were never taken home so all of them were run to the ground.
1 uniqueguy263 2017-12-03
OP seems like a really bad troll to me
1 Thyrotoxic 2017-12-03
Shooting black people is fine, shooting dogs is not fine. Reddit.
1 Dukkerz 2017-12-03
Yeah, people get all weird about whether the dog dies in films too.
1 OldeHickory 2017-12-03
Most people get guns to hunt or shoot tin cans in the middle of nowhere. That's all I want to do with a gun.
1 ____________13 2017-12-03
Practically every owner thinks their dog is an angel. Some of them are wrong.
1 xoiz 2017-12-03
IT DINDUNUFFIN IT WUZ A GOOD BOYE
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-03
G O O D B O Y E
1 TheButtholeOfBravery 2017-12-03
Hello innocent boye 👋👋👋👋
1 umar4812 2017-12-03
LE DOGGOSPEAK FELLOW REDDITEURS
1 IneedSomeThrowaway 2017-12-03
source: https://www.theonion.com/heroic-pit-bull-journeys-2-000-miles-to-attack-owner-1819587144
1 PoorLilMarco 2017-12-03
Pitbulls are the dogbreed of peace.
1 AlohaWarrior34 2017-12-03
Inshallah.
1 BurgerLaowai 2017-12-03
Aloha Snackbar
1 EarnestNoMeta 2017-12-03
Ooh this is good
1 Charles_Thunderpenis 2017-12-03
Hey my darling pibble is completely harmless, he's never even ripped a 3 year old's face off!!
1 Zozbot 2017-12-03
zoz
1 Zozbot 2017-12-03
zle
1 Zozbot 2017-12-03
zozzle
1 PoorLilMarco 2017-12-03
Fuck you zozbot
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-03
Shut the fuck up you dumb fuck!
1 Lovemesometoasts 2017-12-03
/u/Zozbot fucking kill yourself already
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-03
Reported to the admins for inciting violence.
1 Lovemesometoasts 2017-12-03
mmmm.....
1 TotesMessenger 2017-12-03
I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)
1 NuclearOnions 2017-12-03
Good bot
1 Dopella 2017-12-03
zozbot is for bullying, /u/Ed_ButteredToast is for gentle consensual buttering 😏😏
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2017-12-03
Doesn't have to be...( ͡° ͜ʖ ) ͡°
1 Lokidude 2017-12-03
Down with the strugglebutter, I see.
1 Dopella 2017-12-03
why is your right eye outside of your face?
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
My Yorkie wants to, but is too small.
1 HodorTheDoorHolder 2017-12-03
My chihuahua will bite your hand if you get any closer
1 aj_thenoob 2017-12-03
Why do you own a cuck dog?
1 HodorTheDoorHolder 2017-12-03
I found him
1 zergling_Lester 2017-12-03
I wonder if /u/mindyourownbusiness3 dogs playfully chase bicyclists as well, without any intention to harm a fly of course, seeing how that's a precondition for hypothetically getting shot by that girl. Or maybe the operative word here is "unprovoked", while bicycle sluts are clearly asking for it?
1 djndndjfnudc 2017-12-03
It’s surreal! A bunch of them came over to argue about me here. Hehhehhehe. Aaaaadorable!
1 Eeffss 2017-12-03
It’s surreal! A bunch of them came over to argue about me here. Hehhehhehe. Aaaaadorable!
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Because you're stupid.
1 serialflamingo 2017-12-03
Please don't buy a gun.
1 WarSanchez 2017-12-03
As an owner of various guns (or various calibers and sporting uses) who wouldn’t harm a fly unless provoked, please don’t ever buy a dog.
1 serialflamingo 2017-12-03
And become one of those people who talks about doggos? No danger of that happening, pal/
1 JohnBlind 2017-12-03
Just learn how to handle dogs, jesus... If you can't be arsed to do a simple thing like that, heed their advice and get bear mace before you shoot some innocent animal out of your pathetic fear...
1 youpostyoudie 2017-12-03
Look into the Judge revolver. It's a 5 cartridge 410 and you can either do pellets (I would recommend this, easier to hit something) or slugs. Also it comes in pink.
Happy trails!
1 MadMaxMercer 2017-12-03
Retarded people dont get to own guns, stop asking.
1 sheepinblack 2017-12-03
If you ever actually shoot a dog, you'll go to jail. That post would prove you planned to kill a dog and went through with it. Moron.
1 m0kemon 2017-12-03
Have you considered that pitbulls might be following you because of the way that you smell? I would recommend taking showers everyday. Then, the pitbulls should stop chasing you as the scent of beef tallow should be slightly diminished.
1 OniTan 2017-12-03
Blow those dogs away! Take back the streets!
1 FuckingIDuser 2017-12-03
Build a doghouse! And make dogs pay for it!
1 Redactor0 2017-12-03
If you're retarded enough to come up with an idea like this and autistic enough that dozens of people telling you it's stupid doesn't get through to you, maybe you're better off just not leaving the house.
1 tinkyXIII 2017-12-03
He types while rocking back and forth, tears rolling down his face.
1 ahbslldud 2017-12-03
Just because they're retarded doesn't mean you're not also retarded.
1 FalmerbloodElixir 2017-12-03
Fuck off retard
1 cigr 2017-12-03
For the most part, it isn't a breed problem. Most dog breeds including pits are fine. The exception is the Chow. Those dogs are just dicks.
1 yamsjustyams 2017-12-03
Except Pitbulls were specifically created/bred to be fighting dogs. It's what they're inclined towards. Just like Border Collies are super hyper because they were bred to be herding animals.
In the 90's, pitbulls accounted for something like 2/3 of all dog related fatalities. Its only gone down because people have learned to not own them.
1 Che_Gueporna 2017-12-03
This.
Nobody gives a shit if a chihuaha or a beagle is a dick. Worst case, you get a nasty bite and then you punt that damn thing away. But a pitbull who is a dick can straight up kill people.
1 grungebot5000 2017-12-03
they’re bred to be fighting dogs, but they kinda fucked up the bloodline 100 years back, in a good way
it’s kind of like owning a small tiger though, it can still kill you by accident lol
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
Pitbulls are like cats: they hate each more than humans.
1 Stillwellstillhere 2017-12-03
I really don't give a shit about what percentage of dogs killed a measly ~400 people over the course of 10 years in a country with a population of 300m. S T A T I S T I C A L L Y I N S I G N I F I C A N T
After pits the next in line will just have a "larger part of the pie" when you omit something in a ratio or percentage. Both numbers would still be too little to give a damn about.
Or is this about feels?
1 RarePepeAficionado 2017-12-03
Practically every owner thinks their retard is an angel. Some of them are wrong.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
I can assure you that my retards are thought of as retards. And one or both of them cause their brand new outside beds to explode
1 hakkzpets 2017-12-03
I know my little angel is completely insane.
Luckily, he is not very big and I always keep him on a leash.
Always found it weird that Americans let their dogs run freely when I moved here.
1 SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-12-03
Everyone knows that little dogs are the worst.
1 Metalman9999 2017-12-03
An example I always love to use: are you a good experienced driver? If you are, im sure you always wear a seatbelt, cause you know that not everything is in your control. Same with Dogs, you have to treat them carefully cause you never know what can happen.
Don't let your big dog run freely, some kid/drunk asshole/idiot might molest them and there will be nothing you can do after that
1 WarSanchez 2017-12-03
Are you a Spanish speaker or are you that scared of /u/Aluzky still
1 Metalman9999 2017-12-03
Spanish speaker, wich would be the correct word to use?
1 WarSanchez 2017-12-03
Probably "provoke".
Molest is basically "acosar sexualmente"
1 Metalman9999 2017-12-03
Edited, thank you!
1 e______d 2017-12-03
Should have left it
1 jaredschaffer27 2017-12-03
Ay, miercoles para la cesped dice que los naufragios son para la albaricoque que tiene una camiseta muy profundo de la asustante para la madrugal
1 Metalman9999 2017-12-03
Autocorrect is a bitch, am I right?
1 jaredschaffer27 2017-12-03
I'll have you saber that I can hablar como una persona muy fucking native.
1 rsaahhuul0 2017-12-03
Are dogs disproportionately molested or something in Spain
1 WarSanchez 2017-12-03
No it's a mistranslation that is hilariously common.
1 TheButtholeOfBravery 2017-12-03
MY PITBULL IS A SWEET LITTLE ANGEL HE WOULDNT HURT A FLY IT DA MEDIAS FAULT 😭😭😭😭😭😭
1 ComedicPause 2017-12-03
Those toddlers are gonna get what's coming to them if they step out of line
1 grungebot5000 2017-12-03
don’t own kids then, they’re a liability
1 OniTan 2017-12-03
/u/mindyourownbusiness3 if you let your dogs run in the streets they deserve to get shot. It's your fault for being a shitty owner. Get a fence or a leash. Otherwise, don't own dogs.
1 mindyourownbusiness3 2017-12-03
But I never said I did. Don’t read what I’m not saying.
1 moush 2017-12-03
Meanwhile these same people will argue that Guns are useful to kill humans threatening their life. Dogs>people?
1 grungebot5000 2017-12-03
“where can I get a cute gun? I need to kill this annoying person around here”
1 xoiz 2017-12-03
/u/Eeffss has my full support, pitbulls are unterhunden and should be gassed ASAP.
1 SlarSlar 2017-12-03
https://imgur.com/a/i9pBi
1 imguralbumbot 2017-12-03
Hi, I'm a bot for linking direct images of albums with only 1 image
https://i.imgur.com/9xjFzi4.jpg
Source | Why? | Creator | ignoreme
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
😂😂😂
1 SPEZ_AKBAR 2017-12-03
I like the one poster who equates aggressive dogs with aggressive Basketball Americans, to show that discrimination based on breed is not ok for humans or dogs.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Oh you mean me.
Issa meme.
1 SabbyNeko 2017-12-03
Circumsoldier is best soldier
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
From /r/Guns (don't worry, not doing any voting, thas a bad maymay and reddit don't like dat.)
OP is not legal to own a firearm as a user of marijuana.
OP also does not present the right mindset for owning and carrying a firearm (In which the firearm is to ONLY be used as a last resort).
OP also seems to think if she shoots a dog, there's no legal repercussions on her whatsoever, and that it's her right to ride down the road shooting any dog that looks at her funny.
So overall, the verdict of "RETARDED" stands.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
As if anybody cares about that shit in the US.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Name an instance where a legal CCW holder showed improper conduct and I'll show you fifty that did...
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Again, that doesn't matter. If you buy a gun you won't be asked if you have the right mindset to own a gun. As if a FFL dealer is going to ask you "Hey, are you going to shot up dogs with this gun? If so, I can't sell it to you. Also please take this psychological evaluation, so that I can see that you aren't batshit crazy."
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
You can't buy a gun and legally carry it in her state... She has to show competence in a self defense class before her CCW is issued to her..
You're missing the entire point though.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Do you think she gives a shit about that?
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
If she doesn't, she's EXACTLY the type of person who doesn't need to be encouraged to purchase a firearm.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Welcome to America. She should own a gun.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
That would make her a felon.
1 shanewater 2017-12-03
I feel like a few years in prison would kick the snowflake out of half these types.
1 shootyourschoolup 2017-12-03
Even more of a reason, think of the headlines! Renegade Retard Runs After Riding Around Ravaging Rottweilers
1 Re_LE_Vant_UN 2017-12-03
They should make shooting things illegally illegal then.
1 im-a-koala 2017-12-03
Yeah but what if the gun is really cute?
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Then you get its number and succy succy.
1 WarSanchez 2017-12-03
Idk if she'd survive those loads...
1 lokiriver 2017-12-03
You can but not where she lives
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I mean't "And just legally carry it immediately."
1 glorica 2017-12-03
1) You have to take a CCW class to get the permit to carry concealed. In that class, she would have to hide the fact that she is in fact not a bloodthirsty maniac for three hours while being talked to and having to participate in a group setting, something she is incapable of because she is not only suffering from autism, but clearly has resentment for people who live in rural areas who make less money than her.
2) Brick and mortar gun dealers have strong incentives not to sell firearms to antisocial unempathetic morons. They can deny sale for any reason. They almost always ask questions in casual conversation to judge the persons state of mind or experience with firearms. They have no shortage of buyers, they don’t need to deal with this woman. She is a headache.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Hey, if the church shooter in Texas could hold it together and purchase a gun, so can this chick. She should just tell the FFL dealer that there are coyotes roaming around in the neighborhood and she fears for the safety of her nieces a nephews she watches.
1 glorica 2017-12-03
He shouldn’t have been able to get a gun in the first place, considering the nature of his armed forces discharge and domestic violence charges. In that case whoever was selling the gun didn’t do their basic fucking job. Personally I wouldn’t have sold him a gun because anyone that ugly can’t be up to any good.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
How can the FFL dealer know that if the army failed to flag his conviction in the federal database?
This rule would probably disqualify 65% of NRA members from owning a gun.
1 glorica 2017-12-03
Is that what happened? I stopped paying attention two days after to keep my head clear for the next one.
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Yes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/11/06/investigators-hunt-for-motive-in-texas-church-shooting-as-the-grieving-spans-generations/
1 glorica 2017-12-03
Well I was wrong. Federal incompetence strikes again.
1 SlarSlar 2017-12-03
That wasn't really the fault of the FFL selling the gun. All they do is make a phone call and wait for a proceed/deny/delay. It's the military's fault for not reporting it and getting him blacklisted on the NICS system.
1 lokiriver 2017-12-03
She wouldnt get it anyway due to where she lives, San Diego doesnt like ccws.
1 ahbslldud 2017-12-03
You ever tried to buy a gun in California? lmao
1 Think_Once 2017-12-03
Did it in Canada. Can't be much worse.
1 hakkzpets 2017-12-03
Wait, are you saying you're going to show fifty examples of a CCW holder showing improper conduct?
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Am running on caffeine you gotta forgive me.
1 ineedmorealts 2017-12-03
I get what you're saying here, but saying that 1 in 50 (or 2%) of CCW holders show improper conducted isn't much helping your cause.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I didn't say there were 1/50, I said if you show me one, I'll show you fifty opposites. On average CCW holders commit less crime and wrongful shootings than our own police officers.
1 ineedmorealts 2017-12-03
This reads like something from the onion.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
There's more than a few sources for that line.
https://crimeresearch.org/2015/02/comparing-conviction-rates-between-police-and-concealed-carry-permit-holders/
It sounds rediculous, but you have to remember, your average civilian has more time to train with their firearms than police officers are. It's a general rule that your average hunter and recreational shooters are more accurate and
1 Chicup 2017-12-03
The more you learn. Its true.
1 ineedmorealts 2017-12-03
I know, it just reads like something from the onion
1 Chicup 2017-12-03
True, but only if you don't know gun/gun owner culture.
1 CloudFlute 2017-12-03
CCW permit-holder accidentally shoots himself when he gets caught in his seatbelt.
CCW permit-holder drives drunk with gun in the glovebox.
CCW permit-holder shoots self in the leg during road rage incident.
Can I have my 150 examples now, please? Actually, to be nice, I'll just ask for 50 :)
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I'm too lazy to copy all of these links, cause it's midnight, but here's a few.
http://www.vindy.com/news/2017/nov/27/suspect-shot-attempted-robbery-dies-over-weekend/?nw=
http://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/crime/2017/11/25/police-discuss-rockledge-homicide-apprehension-gunman/894502001/
http://www.dentonrc.com/news/news/2017/11/20/blotter-womans-stepfather-defends-licensed-pistol
http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/36805445/police-witness-shoots-man-who-stabbed-his-own-stepfather-in-east-las-vegas
http://wpde.com/news/local/police-shots-fired-during-armed-robbery-at-surfside-beach-pharmacy
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/cpl-holder-shoots-kills-man-at-gas-station-in-highland-park
https://wydaily.com/2017/10/19/police-armed-clerk-thwarts-robber-at-7-eleven-nws/
For more you can easily just go on /r/DGU and search by the CCW flair.
1 caffienatedjedi 2017-12-03
Sounds like she would do great in the atf though
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
ATF is already finding her phone number.
1 IAintThatGuy 2017-12-03
You need to be autistic to find ways to enforce all those obscure rules in a way that allows you to jam up legal gun owners to the max. The passion for dog killing is just icing on the cake.
1 Hemingwavy 2017-12-03
So you're trying to restrict a fellow Americans 2nd amendment rights based on your opinion? I didn't realise fascism had crept so far in /r/guns.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
My opinion is that she's retarded and needs to become un-retarded before handling a firearm, not that she shouldn't own a gun period. The ATF, however, doesn't agree, being as she's a pothead, their Opinion (which matters a whoooole lot more than mine) is that she can't own one, period.
1 Jrook 2017-12-03
Yeah most concealed carry people, are in my opinion, really just scientists and scholars. Like, never seen a 350 pound man in line at mcdonalds with a .22 on his hip and though "good christ, how did they become so woke?"
1 DannyLee90 2017-12-03
Hey, man, you never know when the squirrels will decide that enough is enough.
1 Hemingwavy 2017-12-03
The only thing that can stop a bad moron with a gun is a good moron with a gun.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Or a bad holster.
1 Hemingwavy 2017-12-03
Only you can prevent forest fires. With a gun.
OR
The only thing that can stop dental tartar is a dentist with a gun.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Hemingway cured his dental problems with a gun, relevant to your username there.
1 FuzzyYakz 2017-12-03
inb4 "help, theres a bullet in my foot"
1 general_tictac 2017-12-03
Like most gun nuts aren't complete retards.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
-smashing the "DISAGREE" button harder than is permitted by our lord and saviour Dunuld Tramp.-
1 RarePepeAficionado 2017-12-03
If you want the 2nd to be protected you should be asking California to be removing their unconstitutional laws about not being able to own firearms if you use marijuana.
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
It has nothing to do with California law, it is a federal law.
1 RarePepeAficionado 2017-12-03
Well then they should be talking to their Senator.
1 LockyBalboaPrime 2017-12-03
Ya...about that...Sen. Feinstein is the bitch that has never met a gun control bill she didn't like, has authored almost all of them in the past 25+ years, doesn't know what a buttstock is, and thinks that a rifle with a pistol grip makes it super mega deadly.
We're basically just totally fucked out here in the great state of Cali.
1 RarePepeAficionado 2017-12-03
Okay? So start a campaign for people all over the country to contact their senators.
1 EarnestNoMeta 2017-12-03
So take her out with a muzzle loader
1 Whifflepoof 2017-12-03
Isn't that a federal law enforced by the ATF, not California?
1 RarePepeAficionado 2017-12-03
It shows up when the state does a federal background check for you to get a permit.
Are you in favor of unrestricted gun ownership without background checks?
1 Delkseypoo 2017-12-03
I'm confused and probably dumb. As long as you've never been charged with anything marijuana related you're fine, right? It isn't like they piss test you when you get a background check is it?
1 RarePepeAficionado 2017-12-03
Are you retarded?
1 Delkseypoo 2017-12-03
Probably. Answer my question faggot
1 SlarSlar 2017-12-03
I just assume anyone who chooses to live in commiefornia is retarded tbh.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
If they got a good job, I can't blame 'em, but otherwise, agree.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-03
Same thing with pit bull owners. /u/CaptainCiph3r pingpong
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I don't own a pitbull.
I own a cat.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Mistakes were made
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
He's good. I do have a feist named Biscuit now, adopted him two days ago.
1 dsclouse117 2017-12-03
Even worse. Enjoy your brain parasites.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Fuck you, I will!
1 dsclouse117 2017-12-03
Lol. I like you. :)
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I like me too.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-03
Tranny, eh?
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Re
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2017-12-03
So ....... Yes
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
This is r/drama . We basically encourage you to vote however you want and generally be a piece of shit
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Ooooh I like being a piece of shit.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
From the volume of your gun posts, I can tell.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Ayyyeeee lmao
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Over at /r/guns we firmly believe that every post is a shitpost and quality content is a thing that doesn't exist
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
The only good posts over there are the shit posts.
1 pepperouchau 2017-12-03
Welcome home, friend. Now show us your butthole.
1 ObsessedAussie 2017-12-03
me too thanks
1 RenegadeJoeson 2017-12-03
Welcome home
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Maybe I will stick around
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
From what I can tell the autism levels are roughly equal but you r/guns people aren't bussyblasted enough to provide quality drama so I say get the fuck out
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
We used to be more autismic when we were allowed to be on /r/weekendgunnit, but Niggins got banned for being a weeb, and I got banned for... Existing.
1 rudest 2017-12-03
there’s your problem right there
1 shallowm 2017-12-03
Found one of the subhumans that have been downvoting lolcows.
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Of course I don't downvote the lolcows. I'm extending the privilege of voting to our honored guests from r/guns.
Have some respect you uncultured hick.
1 Elecdim00 2017-12-03
I’m home
1 300BLK_Lives_Matter 2017-12-03
Subbed.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Ayeeee lmao
1 CaptainMemer 2017-12-03
It appears you haven’t heard of something called the Second Amendment.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
It appears you haven't heard of Concealed Carry laws.
1 CaptainMemer 2017-12-03
I don’t need laws when I have the Gorilla Mindset.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Free my nigga Rhodesia.
1 EarnestNoMeta 2017-12-03
It appears you aint know a nigga strapped
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
It appears you have activated my trap card.
1 SamWhite 2017-12-03
Actually us voting in your linked thread would be considered against reddit rules, you can do whatever the fuck you want in the linking thread. Also this is /r/Drama, it's almost entirely unmoderated. Shit your pants and post a picture of it if you like. Or don't, you do you.
1 shootyourschoolup 2017-12-03
plz no bully KK
1 runningoutofdaylight 2017-12-03
This isn’t technically correct about weed. You can be a user of it, in legal states which California technically is for users prior to the first of January when the first temporary permits are licensed for legal sales- she just can’t be in possession of it without looking at federal charging. That said, a weird part of the law here in WA reveals that if you’re a legal cannabis license business license holder, which I am, I can own a personal firearm. However, my employees cannot while also in possession of cannabis. It’s very weird. I had a long convo with our enforcement agent at the LCB about it a few weeks ago. I don’t totally get it.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Form 4473 says no, even if your state has legalized it, and it will remain that way until marijuana is deregulated and legalized. The state has no say.
1 runningoutofdaylight 2017-12-03
Just letting you know what our government tells us. Honestly the state has been our only controlling entity- the feds have shown zero interest in what we’re doing at all. They explicitly give firearm possession rights to license holders for protection. Like I said, I don’t get it. But the issue in the prior comment has more to do with the physical ownership of both cannabis and guns- using it but not having any on you wouldn’t factor in. That’s all I was getting at.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I'm just telling you as a former gun dealer, with friends who buy guns in Cali, it's still illegal, federally, and as such it's a felony to lie on that form even in California.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
I'm just telling you as a former gun dealer, with friends who buy guns in Cali, it's still illegal, federally, and as such it's a felony to lie on that form even in California.
1 runningoutofdaylight 2017-12-03
Calm down bro. Just telling you what Washington is like.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
It's the same for WA.
1 jewdanksdad 2017-12-03
Heck out her post history though, it's a real hoot!
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Did the second she posted, looking for /r/trees, found more than I hoped for.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Did the second she posted, looking for /r/trees, found more than I hoped for.
1 ineedmorealts 2017-12-03
Even as someone who believes that gun ownership should be heavily restricted, I think this is a stupid law. I don't think people who are currently high should be carrying firearms, but I din't think drug use should prevent legal gun ownership.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
Oh, I agree, there are legitimate reasons to use marijuana and it's unconstitutional that the ATF is allowed to take this stance, but it's hard enough to fight for our own rights (as gun owners), we can't do the fighting for the potheads too.
1 Lawgustmarck 2017-12-03
I follow both r/drama and r/guns so I will vote (and would have regardless).
I concur with the findings but dissent in part as to the final verdict. The verdict should stand as: HIGH IQ RICK AND MORTY FAN.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
To be fair you have to have a pretty High IQ to ride a bike autistically.
1 Chicup 2017-12-03
This isn't SRD, those faggots will ban you, here, we want whatever shit you can fling.
1 80BAIT08 2017-12-03
/u/eeffss could I perhaps recommend the automatic glock 18.
1 kommerkom 2017-12-03
shit recommendation
1 80BAIT08 2017-12-03
Okay Operator Chromosome
1 shallowm 2017-12-03
not recommending getting 3 Glock 21s
1 faiththepianofrog 2017-12-03
Juciy dram, imma steal and post to SRD
1 TinyJibble 2017-12-03
Hope they jerk the other way.
1 FuzzyYakz 2017-12-03
☑ Neurodiverse Heroine
☑ Rednecks
☑ Guns
☑ /r/Drama comments
Yep, I'd say the anti-jerk is ready.
1 TinyJibble 2017-12-03
The SRD thread seems pretty chill so far. Theres only one guy sperging a bit about "muh altrights" and everyone else is enjoying the popcorn. I wonder if they finally cleaned the place out.
1 P1r4nha 2017-12-03
Well, besides wanting to illegally carry a gun, taking about doing any harm to dogs is not a winning strategy in the internet.
Also guns aren't cute, people with guns are cute.
1 Illyana_Rasputin 2017-12-03
Some broad just wants to Vick some puppers and all these gun nuts turn into Chuck Schumer.
1 Prime67 2017-12-03
Underappreciated comment of the day.
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
We already have enough pupper murder on our plates as it is, what with the GayTF breathing down our necks. Dont need no mo.
1 Prime67 2017-12-03
I was just appreciating the Michael Vick and Crying Chuck references.
1 IAintThatGuy 2017-12-03
She should have said she wanted to go Dindu hunting.
1 0xnull 2017-12-03
Jesus, I hope you don't actually believe that.
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
You don't need to kill them; buckets of fried chicken will distract them long enough for you to escape
1 SnackBier 2017-12-03
Not a single person suggested getting this gun. Sad. Just Sad.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Buying a Taurus will yield a similar result
1 Booonet 2017-12-03
a Liven better
1 Booonet 2017-12-03
3 upvotes? People here will upvote anything, What i said doesn't even mean anything, I wrote something random.
1 Cr3X1eUZ 2017-12-03
Or this http://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-what-happens-when-you-sell-pink-guns-that-look-like-toys-2013-2
1 MooseHeckler 2017-12-03
An hero gun.
1 IllHeir 2017-12-03
I’m super sorry but I don’t get what’s special about the gun. Are you being serious or like is it a joke because of how the gun is shaped? Pls help ty
1 searingsky 2017-12-03
Xd
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
Ekks dee
1 Standard12 2017-12-03
Which retard are you again?
1 fucknazimodzzz 2017-12-03
rar_ekks_dee
1 CaptainCiph3r 2017-12-03
She's something, aye?
1 Neon_needles 2017-12-03
Imo, give her a gun. A pitbull gets shot (good!) And a autistic women gets beat to death by an angry Mexican family (better!) Who then go to court and get off due causing another large drama thread ab9ut illegal aliens (Best!)
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2017-12-03
/u/eeffss, just get a telescopic baton and bash the dogs brains in. Less noise, less legal hoops to jump through, and a whole lot more fun.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaactually, many states ban batons and some states, like mine will require you have a concealed weapons permit in order to carry one. Same for brass knuckles. Yes I know they it to you as a "paper weight," but try explaining to a law enforcement official why your paper weight is a set of brass knuckles
1 TUMS_FESTIVAL 2017-12-03
Wow...fucking liberals.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
I found the problem. Fucking liberals just breeds more liberals
1 jlong1202 2017-12-03
A very heavy steel bike pump on the top tube
1 bareballzthebitch 2017-12-03
Can't you just feed the dog chocolate or something?
1 Whifflepoof 2017-12-03
Jfc, looking at her posting history it's clear that she needs to stay away from guns. Clueless but think she knows everything (even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary; i.e. it is against federal law to own a gun if using marijuana, even "legally"), serious social aggression problems and mental issues beyond that, at least some delusion. Oh and that nagging "neurological disorder" that she tells everyone she has and then gets mad when people bring it up.
While you can have philosophical difference with r/guns, it's hard to deny that they were far more knowledgeable on guns, laws, and demeanor, and she just started calling everyone redneck morons when they laid the law out for her to read. It's scary to think there are these untrained, ignorant people out there that /r/guns is begging not to get a gun, but so full of themselves they refuse to consider it.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
We get many post by people who definitely do not need to own guns. Like posts from suicidal people, people intending to cause harm to others, people looking to break laws, mental issues, and a whole host of various kinds of nope. We give them an answer and it's not the answer they wante to hear so they all get fanny troubled in response and suddenly we are all no nothings
1 pestilence 2017-12-03
That's gun ownership in the US in a nutshell. Doing your thing, following the rules, and constantly being shit on by people who are completely ignorant of how things really are.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
And taking pictures of your guns with weeaboo shit and calling glock owners a bunch of faggots
1 FuzzyYakz 2017-12-03
found the glock owner
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Walther master race
1 Spectre_06 2017-12-03
Glock owners are faggots though.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
Which is why we call then faggots. Slightly better than the 1911 fanbois who haven't matured in over 100 years
1 Chicup 2017-12-03
Its grandpaw vrs Rupauls Dragrace.
1 Chicup 2017-12-03
redundant.
1 SuperObviousShill 2017-12-03
I think that the best decision /r/guns ever made was to make a no k-pop policy.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
It's actually very pro kpop
1 SuperObviousShill 2017-12-03
No. It is not. This is wrong. You are wrong.
1 Iggins01 2017-12-03
This is my religion, please be tolerant
1 Prime67 2017-12-03
Pretty sure a best litmus test of wether or not you should own a gun is when the entirety of the most pro 2A subreddit there is says "nah, maybe you specifically shouldn't own one.
1 TwinQuasar 2017-12-03
Half of reddit doesn't know this.
1 geraldo42 2017-12-03
Every time someone brings that up (and I see /r/guns posters go on about it all the time) I just think about that weird homeschooled kid in the after school activities who thought you were going to get arrested for smoking a cigarette. Like, do people actually think that's a big deal? What weird fucking twilight zone do you live in where the feds are care about gun owners smoking weed? I assume everyone who talks about that is from some conservative bible belt state where the cops arrest you for smoking pot and they've convinced themselves that feds are like that too. Do you also think the feds are going to start raiding the dispensaries?
1 Shit___Taco 2017-12-03
RRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEe
1 JumbledFun 2017-12-03
/u/eeffss mentally handicapped people aren't allowed to own guns because retards love to do stupid shit
1 VintageCake 2017-12-03
i sincerely hope she is on some sort of government list of people that should be monitored, that is some class-A crazy
1 cuteman 2017-12-03
/u/eeffss come be autistic here!
Not permanently, but temporarily so we can bask in your sperg out.
1 I_smell_like_bacon 2017-12-03
Another Rick & Morty fan, I see.
1 MooseHeckler 2017-12-03
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Rick and Morty. The humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the jokes will go over a typical viewer’s head. There’s also Rick’s nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Narodnaya Volya literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these jokes, to realise that they’re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Rick & Morty truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the humour in Rick’s existential catchphrase “Wubba Lubba Dub Dub,” which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev’s Russian epic Fathers and Sons. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Dan Harmon’s genius wit unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools.. how I pity them. 😂
And yes, by the way, i DO have a Rick & Morty tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid 😎
1 shootyourschoolup 2017-12-03
Don't they have gun trade-ins? She has some chromosomes to spare.
1 PizzaRollers 2017-12-03
hi
1 wwaalleess 2017-12-03
What a useless comment
1 dukwon 2017-12-03
hi
1 Wild_Child19 2017-12-03
hi
1 Zeuter 2017-12-03
who
1 Singulaire 2017-12-03
Post bussy.
1 peachhay 2017-12-03
hi
1 SugarInMyMeatPi 2017-12-03
The only thing on my mind while going through her post history was that picture shadman drew of that autistic girl with a gun in her mouth with a sign that said “PLEASE BE PATIENT IM AUTISTIC” lol
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
I have the most confused penis right now
1 SugarInMyMeatPi 2017-12-03
I’m not gonna lie, so do I. :thinking: this might be the birth of a new fetish
1 po0pdawg 2017-12-03
Artist is Shadman. He has a LOT more art that gets more fucked up than this.
1 RenegadeJoeson 2017-12-03
My face when I don't have a retarded autistic dog hating girlfriend.
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
😀
1 smallsea 2017-12-03
"this is why you're autistic" best thread in a while
1 Reynoodlepoodle 2017-12-03
It's the current year and there are still people who don't want to kill all pitbulls?
I cant even
1 Gothmog26 2017-12-03
You have served us well , op. You may have your trendies with the autistic dipping sauce.
1 leva549 2017-12-03
10/10 thread. This is the good stuff, will save for a rainy day.