Jump to content

Recommended Posts

When/if I have children I'll probably pepper my house with assorted pistol safes... However, the best way to keep your kids out of your guns is to remove the mystery. Let them see them/handle them in your supervision when they ask. If mom had her dildo on the kitchen table sometimes I doubt the kids would have gone looking for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I hate people who are so stupid they can't teach their own family to not play with guns and

then try to tell me to lock them up.

 

I didn't buy guns to be unarmed in my own house.

 

My kids are smarter than cottage cheese, and don't touch or play or allow anyone else near

firearms in the house.

 

I was raised around guns and so were my kids.

 

If you don't want your kids around them.......then keep them at home.

 

I don't want your little brats at my house anyway

 

 

rant off

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have children in the house often but when we do I lock up the guns. 

 

Because I didn't raise your kids and I'm not going to let one of them shoot themselves or someone else.

 

Because those are MY guns and I'M responsible for keeping them away from those who have no business with them. 

 

And using some humor to remind people of that is a good idea.  It's not an personal insult or an assault on your freedom.

 

I have a little experience with someone getting my gun who had no business with it.  Fortunately the damage was only to property.

Edited by Darth Saigus
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have children in the house often but when we do I lock up the guns. 

 

Because I didn't raise your kids and I'm not going to let one of them shoot themselves or someone else.

 

Because those are MY guns and I'M responsible for keeping them away from those who have no business with them. 

 

And using some humor to remind people of that is a good idea.  It's not an personal insult or an assault on your freedom.

 

I have a little experience with someone getting my gun who had no business with it.  Fortunately the damage was only to property.

 

I do the same thing and also with medications. Not necessarily locked up, but certainly out of reach.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a hilarious vid  haha.gif

 

 

With our kids, we can leave a firearm out with very little worry, except for being bugged about checking it out, them getting to clean it or taking them to the range for some plinking.

 

Any other kids, especially their hoard of undisciplined & uneducated brat cousins...  Lock them up!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I too grew up with firearms in the house, I had plenty of training, I knew they were not toys and thus NEVER played with them. I used mine for hunting and to protect my mother.

 

After I grew up and had my own kids there was a respectable fear of me in the house, and when I told them not to fuck with something they knew I meant business and they respected it. My kids were taught what guns are used for and the dangers associated with improper handling of them.

None of my kids ever showed any real interest in firearms, not even my son who spent 17 years in the army shocked.gif    I guess he had enough in the sand pile and that shithole rock pile.

 

These fuken liberals do not want to take personal accountability for anything, and they don't trust that you will.....so lock em up boys and girls nonono.gif

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I need to invest in a Dildo safe now....

I see WalMart is low on value packs of AA batteries....

Anyone know of any deals?

 

Do you have a massive dildo collection or something? Your secret is safe with us!

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's just ahead of the curve in case there's a panic on dildos and dildo accessories.

Better to have 'em and not need 'em than need 'em and not have 'em.

Once the panic buying starts, Hopefully, I'll have all I'll ever want and a lifetime supply of AA batteries!

grimace.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what do you guys think of EVOLVE, the group who made the commercial?  Here is the faq page of their website  http://www.takeonthecode.com/faqs.html

 

They seem to believe the propagandized bullshit pseudo-info about gun accidents and seem to ignore that most gun violence is based in gang violence drug activity and police shootings.  

 

I think the message is good, as long as it doesnt start being part and parcel with the idea of further restrictions.  They claim to be non-political, is this even possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what do you guys think of EVOLVE, the group who made the commercial?  Here is the faq page of their website  http://www.takeonthecode.com/faqs.html

 

They seem to believe the propagandized bullshit pseudo-info about gun accidents and seem to ignore that most gun violence is based in gang violence drug activity and police shootings.  

 

I think the message is good, as long as it doesnt start being part and parcel with the idea of further restrictions.  They claim to be non-political, is this even possible?

 

I think they are trying to promote common sense gun ownership.  I don't think they're secretly pushing for gun control.  I think they accept the fact that gun ownership is a Constitutional right.  They want to work with gun owners to reduce the number of accidents and misuse.  They say they need buy in from gun owners, and you don't get that if you even hint at any kind of ban.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time will tell if they stick to their apolitical stance, but there is a hint of legislative goals ("smarter acquisition") in the faqs.  Still, their approach has some merit to it.  The problem of gun violence is more central to the debate over gun control that we might care to admit.  Were media-friendly carnage not so readily available for broadcast, the only proponents of gun control would be viewed as doomsday prophets or pro-police statists.  Think of pressure cookers before the Boston Marathon bombing.  If a talking head had clamored for the banning of pressure cooker sales without that incident, they'd be considered a nut.

 

And if they're a leftist fringe group trying to infiltrate more conservative sectors of society for whatever reason, "Evolve" doesn't strike me as a name they'd choose to try snuggling up with.  "Abort" maybe...

Edited by DrThunder88
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like backdoor bloomberg money experimenting with options for a nationally accepted voice of disarmament.  

 

I want to think its altruistic and motivated by good intentions, but Im not on board with their 'reasons why'.  Hence, their true motivations are a mystery to me. 

Like:  

THE MURDER RATE IS FALLING TO LOWEST LEVELS IN DECADES; WHY IS EVOLVE CONCERNED?

Over 30,000 U.S. deaths and 100,000-plus accidents per year by firearms from criminal, suicides, and accidents is an unacceptably large number.

  

If they did any amount of research and critical thinking into the reasons for most gun violence, they would realize that its primarily economically based and 'public safety broadcasts' will have little effect.  The numbers of true accidents with guns is pretty low, much too low seemingly for a national conversation, especially in a time when our rights are under extreme duress.  Also, mentioning suicide is another cop out to pad statistics, imo.

 

While I agree with most of 'The Code', Numbers 3 and 4 and 6 seem like a bit much.

 3) Of course guns in the wrong hands are dangerous,  but who are the wrong hands, and who should we let define 'wrong'?  its too subjective and seems to lead thoughts in the direction of legally classifying more 'wrong hands'.

4) an unloaded gun is useless.  while they may be locked up, not all should be unloaded.  Its sound for child safety, but nothing else.

6)Being answerable at ALL TIMES is a little crazy.  In your home, under your roof, cool.  If you lend a shotgun to a buddy who has a hunting accident, not cool.  This also points to thought reform where laws could be made tighter, even if your gun gets stolen.

 

I realize im being a little picky, but Im using the wording they chose to get their point across.  

Do any of you agree with every single one, for every situation?   I cant imagine any freedom/ self defense minded person going for all of them, always.

 It seems they are attempting to soften up the minds of gun owners for more 'common sense' regulation support..

post-31894-0-98093900-1403906271_thumb.jpg

Edited by Boomsick42
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He's just ahead of the curve in case there's a panic on dildos and dildo accessories.

Better to have 'em and not need 'em than need 'em and not have 'em.

Once the panic buying starts, Hopefully, I'll have all I'll ever want and a lifetime supply of AA batteries!

grimace.gif

 

 

I have always argued that tampons would be one of the best currency options in the new world... I never considered dildos..

 

It seems like backdoor bloomberg money experimenting with options for a nationally accepted voice of disarmament.  

 

I want to think its altruistic and motivated by good intentions, but Im not on board with their 'reasons why'.  Hence, their true motivations are a mystery to me. 

Like:  

THE MURDER RATE IS FALLING TO LOWEST LEVELS IN DECADES; WHY IS EVOLVE CONCERNED?

Over 30,000 U.S. deaths and 100,000-plus accidents per year by firearms from criminal, suicides, and accidents is an unacceptably large number.

  

If they did any amount of research and critical thinking into the reasons for most gun violence, they would realize that its primarily economically based and 'public safety broadcasts' will have little effect.  The numbers of true accidents with guns is pretty low, much too low seemingly for a national conversation, especially in a time when our rights are under extreme duress.  Also, mentioning suicide is another cop out to pad statistics, imo.

 

While I agree with most of 'The Code', Numbers 3 and 4 and 6 seem like a bit much.

 3) Of course guns in the wrong hands are dangerous,  but who are the wrong hands, and who should we let define 'wrong'?  its too subjective and seems to lead thoughts in the direction of legally classifying more 'wrong hands'.

4) an unloaded gun is useless.  while they may be locked up, not all should be unloaded.  Its sound for child safety, but nothing else.

6)Being answerable at ALL TIMES is a little crazy.  In your home, under your roof, cool.  If you lend a shotgun to a buddy who has a hunting accident, not cool.  This also points to thought reform where laws could be made tighter, even if your gun gets stolen.

 

I realize im being a little picky, but Im using the wording they chose to get their point across.  

Do any of you agree with every single one, for every situation?   I cant imagine any freedom/ self defense minded person going for all of them, always.

 

I think it reads more like the standard Fudd stuff than any Bloombucks agenda. He has had absolutely no problem getting our scum bag politicians behind him with a pretty obviously extremist viewpoint. Ultimately its those dirt bags who will sell us out, not the American people as a whole (like Obamacare and "immigration reform" that virtually no one wants).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I search and read, this organization looks like a re-branded gun control group.  I may be late to the punch, since there has been talk about them for a while.  

 

I cant find a pro gun organization that thinks their message is genuine, but I can find a bunch of liberal praise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Evolve is a group concocted and funded by northeast advertising execs, whose political leanings are probably predictable.

 

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/daniel-zimmerman/coonan/

 

Evolve exists to unite concerned citizens working toward common sense reform. We are about action. We understand that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms—just not ALL arms.

Edited by mancat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Evolve is a group concocted and funded by northeast advertising execs, whose political leanings are probably predictable.

 

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/daniel-zimmerman/coonan/

 

Evolve exists to unite concerned citizens working toward common sense reform. We are about action. We understand that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms—just not ALL arms.

 

Well that's disappointing, but thanks for finding this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 the right to keep and bear arms—just not ALL arms

 

 

and there it is.....

 

piss on them...

 

if they were legit, they would be worried about falling, poison, fire, choking, and drowning.

 

and as for the vid,,,

 

I would rather explain to young children not to play with guns than what a dildo is....

Edited by read_the_wall
Link to post
Share on other sites

I waited over 30 seconds for the site to load, but it did not, so I clicked off of it. No Patience today. Yep...over 55 years ago, we learned all the necessary and very important gun safety stuff. Learned more in Cub, Boy and Sea scouts. Why everybody is not getting this gun education today is something I for one do not understand. We were taught growing up....why not everybody else? Just me. HB

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And if they're a leftist fringe group trying to infiltrate more conservative sectors of society for whatever reason, "Evolve" doesn't strike me as a name they'd choose to try snuggling up with.  "Abort" maybe...

Yeah the very name Evolve gives a huge clue as to who this group is to me.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The real horror is those boys using them on each other.

Gun safety starts and ends with the parents.

 

 

Is it wrong that I think some people just should not have them? Probably

 

The holy grail is how do you figure that out and not stomp to death everyone's rights? I'll never know being an old stupid fart........

Link to post
Share on other sites

The real horror is those boys using them on each other.

Gun safety starts and ends with the parents.

 

 

Is it wrong that I think some people just should not have them? Probably

 

The holy grail is how do you figure that out and not stomp to death everyone's rights? I'll never know being an old stupid fart........

It would only be possible IF we understood the human brain better and had a govt that was actually for the people.  

 

The human mind is so vast and calculating.  With all the computers and technical prowess of the 21st century, we still dont have systems that 100% detect lies, even for the most heinous of court cases.  Also, we have no idea how to detect mental illness in someone who claims and shows no symptoms, even if they will eventually snap.  Maybe someday, after every nerve, synapse, cell, chemical, and electrical pattern is mapped and 'decoded', we can have a set of tests to tell who is and who is not a timebomb.  There still is a problem though, we are not taking into account for the persons job, family, stress levels, and all of the interactions which could also make someone explode.  For something reliable, id bet 100yrs minimum, if ever. 

 

Even if we as responsible humans could devise such a system to tell the good from the bad apples, it would take a responsible govt to implement it properly and make certain no ones rights were infringed upon.  Looking at the ethical decline of our current system, it would be a cold day in hell.  

 

So, as long as humans are greedy, lying, gullible, sacks of shit, a true catch all system will never be possible.  A full scale confiscation is more plausible in reality, money and human costs considered.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So if humans are greedy ,lying , gullible sacks of shit . How does that equate with " Even if we as responsible humans could devise such a system to tell the good from the bad apples"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if humans are greedy ,lying , gullible sacks of shit . How does that equate with " Even if we as responsible humans could devise such a system to tell the good from the bad apples"?

Exactly.  Without sufficient technology and ethical govt implementation it could never work, without trampling our constitutional rights that is.  While I do believe the technology and understanding will get there, I dont believe any govt is always for the people, and very few world govts allow their citizens to own weapons anyways.   

So even if a system worked properly, it would be used to disarm citizens under the guise of public safety.

Edited by Boomsick42
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...