The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-25-2013, 09:03 AM   #101
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
LMAO So when this place plays a movie, they keep the house lights up and dim the screen eh?

Jesus you are a moron. Do you not realize that the lighting conditions at work before and after the movie are nothing like the lighting conditions DURING the movie? Do you not understand the basic biology in play of being in a darkened room staring at a bright light source?

Your "point" has been ripped to shreds kid. Your pictures are pointless and the fact that you don't even grasp the difference between the lighting conditions during and before/after a movie in playing speaks volumes about just how incapable of basic reasoning you are.



LMAO No on here is angry but you. Most people would be angry too if they were shown to be a complete moron over and over again like you have been.




houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:08 AM   #102
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Hey Fed, do you feel like schooling DramaSoshulismnyuk on the nuances in the term "assault weapon" as it relates to military capability and get him to look like a fool just like you did with cut and Beavis, or you gonna sit this one out?

houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:24 AM   #103
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,639

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Go back to the thread starter,is this the same Heller,as in heller vs dc,that SCOTUS ruled that guns can be regulated & that machine guns & the like can be banned.
peacepipe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:28 AM   #104
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,728

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Hey Fed, do you feel like schooling DramaSoshulismnyuk on the nuances in the term "assault weapon" as it relates to military capability and get him to look like a fool just like you did with cut and Beavis, or you gonna sit this one out?

I'll wait to see if it's even possible for the vapid one to grasp the difference between move playing and movie not playing.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 03:36 PM   #105
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

Trying to say some dead person, shot by a gunman, might not have had a better chance if he was armed is a joke. It doesn't matter if the room is pitch black you have a better chance to live while someone shooting at you if you also are armed.

No way being unarmed in a theater with a gunman shooting makes you safer then being armed. The gunman shot people after walking right up on them. For sure at that point had the person been armed they would have shot the gunman.

Could people be shot by accident while someone was trying to defend themselvs or others? of course they could that is also 100% reasonable.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 03:37 PM   #106
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Hey Fed, do you feel like schooling DramaSoshulismnyuk on the nuances in the term "assault weapon" as it relates to military capability and get him to look like a fool just like you did with cut and Beavis, or you gonna sit this one out?

Sorry but he never proved more people killed with assault weapons. In fact i won that argument proving its handguns that are the real danger.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 03:39 PM   #107
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

It's already DOA anyways. No liberals in red states have the guts to go after peoples guns so really gun control already watered down and over with. Game, set, match to the NRA.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 03:42 PM   #108
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

A few states like CO will make token laws limiting clip size but all that will do is push some jobs out of your state. Oh and maybe increase law enforcement costs by having another law to police.

It won't though change the homicide rate in CO one bit. Why? because criminals don't use assault rifles with 30 round clips very often and the ones that do won't care about your stupid law.

A kid can still grab dads rifle and accidently kill himself with a 10 round clip. A person can still go on a rampage with a 10 round clip. So really its dont nothing. Of course liberal ****twads on the board want you to believe that smaller clip give you a shot when the gunman has to reload. sorry people you can literally reload in under 5 seconds.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 03:49 PM   #109
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Trying to say some dead person, shot by a gunman, might not have had a better chance if he was armed is a joke. It doesn't matter if the room is pitch black you have a better chance to live while someone shooting at you if you also are armed.

No way being unarmed in a theater with a gunman shooting makes you safer then being armed. The gunman shot people after walking right up on them. For sure at that point had the person been armed they would have shot the gunman.

Could people be shot by accident while someone was trying to defend themselvs or others? of course they could that is also 100% reasonable.
Again.

In that situation, with those circumstances, with the extensive experience I have in what it actually looks like while a movie is playing and what it looks like in an auditorium when everyone panics, I can say with about 99% certainty that the body count would have been significantly higher had there been one or more concealed weapons in the audience.

Yes. The person holding the gun is always at least a little safer. No one is arguing that. We are arguing the fact that the danger to the surrounding people increases as you add guns to the situation. The vast majority of people with concealed carry permits are not ex-military or ex-law enforcement. They are average shmoes with no tactical training and only a very basic understanding of how to actually make the bullet go where they want it to. They are people who don't have the faintest clue what it feels like to be tear gassed.

No thanks. The group as a whole is safer with bullets only flying in one direction.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 04:05 PM   #110
Mecklomaniac
Pro Bowler
 
Mecklomaniac's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: WA
Posts: 713

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Jack Dolbin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post

No thanks. The group as a whole is safer with bullets only flying in one direction.

And the group as a whole is safer if we hand over the plane and let the trained professionals negotiate with the hijackers after they land the plane.
Mecklomaniac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:11 PM   #111
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,728

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Trying to say some dead person, shot by a gunman, might not have had a better chance if he was armed is a joke. It doesn't matter if the room is pitch black you have a better chance to live while someone shooting at you if you also are armed.

No way being unarmed in a theater with a gunman shooting makes you safer then being armed. The gunman shot people after walking right up on them. For sure at that point had the person been armed they would have shot the gunman.

Could people be shot by accident while someone was trying to defend themselvs or others? of course they could that is also 100% reasonable.
You really are a straw man serial killer. It's pretty sad.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:13 PM   #112
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,728

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Sorry but he never proved more people killed with assault weapons. In fact i won that argument proving its handguns that are the real danger.
LMAO I see you're still lost on what we were talking about, or simply to dishonest (as usual) to acknowledge it.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:20 PM   #113
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

There is no assault weapons problem or a rifle problem in our country. Just like 9-11 and the patriot act going to far our govt is once again using isolated incidents to take away our freedoms. Seriously give me one argument how Americans are killed or threatened by the people who own assault rifles? Very few incidents involving them. It's such a non issue that no on will even argue with me that its needed because of the number of incidents. The best people can say is do you really need 30 rounds? We could kill the gunman as he reloads? or you don't need them for hunting? or a shotgun is better for protection? or Feds beauty, the potential the guns are more dangerous even though they haven't been used for many crimes or murders? Like a pre-emptive gun ban based on the fact if people started using them we would wish we didn't have them?

Fact is assault rifles don't appeal to criminals. The only time they make the news is a brazen robbery where they would just get fully auto or bypass your clip law etc and the off random attack like the colo shooting.

We can't stop people from going crazy. The only smart gun control is by saying if you get caught with a gun and your a felon we give you 25 yrs hard labor. If you use a gun in a crime during a robbery its 35 yrs hard labor. If you kill someone regardless of how you do it unless its self defense you get life hard labor. No more kick back prisons make them work until it kills them. I think they would make great miners. We should build prisons right on top of rare earth mines and let them have at it.

Liberals want to be soft on crime then come back and say wow the world is scary. Maybe we shouldn't have guns. But all that does is leave people in a survival of the fittest when it comes to confrontations. Someone bigger and stronger then you arrives and you are screwed. Or some criminal who doesn't follow the law has one up on you because he is armed.

make no mistake about it many many liberal politicans would love to outlaw all guns.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:27 PM   #114
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,728

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Know what the minimum firearm training necessary for a concealed carry in Colorado?

A hunter's safety course (in many counties, though I don't know all).

(ironically perhaps, this is how I obtained mine)

ROFL

Hunter's education, where you learn valuable urban combat skills like how to carry and store a rifle safely, and how to identify if a particular elk has the legally required points, how to field dress various game animals, and basic wilderness survival.

Oh, and how to shoot a BB gun! Woot!
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:30 PM   #115
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,728

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
There is no assault weapons problem or a rifle problem in our country. Just like 9-11 and the patriot act going to far our govt is once again using isolated incidents to take away our freedoms. Seriously give me one argument how Americans are killed or threatened by the people who own assault rifles? Very few incidents involving them. It's such a non issue that no on will even argue with me that its needed because of the number of incidents. The best people can say is do you really need 30 rounds? We could kill the gunman as he reloads? or you don't need them for hunting? or a shotgun is better for protection? or Feds beauty, the potential the guns are more dangerous even though they haven't been used for many crimes or murders? Like a pre-emptive gun ban based on the fact if people started using them we would wish we didn't have them?

Fact is assault rifles don't appeal to criminals. The only time they make the news is a brazen robbery where they would just get fully auto or bypass your clip law etc and the off random attack like the colo shooting.

We can't stop people from going crazy. The only smart gun control is by saying if you get caught with a gun and your a felon we give you 25 yrs hard labor. If you use a gun in a crime during a robbery its 35 yrs hard labor. If you kill someone regardless of how you do it unless its self defense you get life hard labor. No more kick back prisons make them work until it kills them. I think they would make great miners. We should build prisons right on top of rare earth mines and let them have at it.

Liberals want to be soft on crime then come back and say wow the world is scary. Maybe we shouldn't have guns. But all that does is leave people in a survival of the fittest when it comes to confrontations. Someone bigger and stronger then you arrives and you are screwed. Or some criminal who doesn't follow the law has one up on you because he is armed.

make no mistake about it many many liberal politicans would love to outlaw all guns.
Once again, cutlet going on totally random tangents. Bravo!
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:36 PM   #116
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

Its stupid to think some cop had he been in that theater with a gun could not have killed holmes. Officer why did he get of 30 shots and you did nothing. Well it was dark ya know? Hell I am a decent shot and have been in a theater a ton of times. After your eyes adjust you can see. Sure it would be difficult to shoot well but if a guy walked up your aisle shooting the notion you would have little chance to hit him without killing tons of innocent people is a joke.

Also though saying it would always end better if citizens were armed is also not correct. You can't predict things like that. Sometimes it would end better sometimes it wouldn't.

I love how Houghtam says because he worked in a theater he knows how it would turn out is pretty funny.

i worked at a bank does that mean i know how to make sure a bank robbery is safer? no it doesn't.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:49 PM   #117
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

It does fit the argument Fed because liberals make an issue where there is none. You have no evidence i have seen showing that people with concealed carry permits shoot people on accident.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:50 PM   #118
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,616
Default

Just like there is no evidence that assault rifles are used to commit a high number of murders or crimes in America.

We need to focus on other things like immigration where some good law can help the country grow and be more fair to immigrants.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 06:59 PM   #119
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,728

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Its stupid to think some cop had he been in that theater with a gun could not have killed holmes.
Good thing no one is saying that, huh strawman-killer.

Quote:
Officer why did he get of 30 shots and you did nothing. Well it was dark ya know? Hell I am a decent shot and have been in a theater a ton of times. After your eyes adjust you can see.
Your eyes aren't going to adjust to the darkness when there's a bright source of light shining in them. Again, basic ****ing biology here folks. No one's arguing that someone with dark adjusted vision in a simple dark room wouldn't have been able to see.

Stop murdering the ****ing strawmen. They deserve to live!

Quote:
Sure it would be difficult to shoot well but if a guy walked up your aisle shooting the notion you would have little chance to hit him without killing tons of innocent people is a joke.
Nice totally unsupported assertion. So a guy's coming at you with a gun. You just start blasting away while in a crowd? You think it's unlikely you're going to hit someone other than the intended target? Really? Most people at a range have a hard time hitting a man sized target @ 15 yards without careful, deliberate aim (i.e. not just "pointing"). And that's in the controlled environment of a range not in a life or death, blood pumping, eyes watering, pissing your pants situation.

Quote:
I love how Houghtam says because he worked in a theater he knows how it would turn out is pretty funny.
He's about the only other person in the thread that doesn't lack the basic brain power to understand that the lighting conditions during the movie are a lot different than at other times.

For instance, your idiotic comments about your eyes adjusting.

So once again we're back to the wingnuts either too dishonest or too stupid to deal with a simple, objective fact of reality because it doesn't suit their ideological beliefs.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 07:12 PM   #120
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Its stupid to think some cop had he been in that theater with a gun could not have killed holmes. Officer why did he get of 30 shots and you did nothing. Well it was dark ya know? Hell I am a decent shot and have been in a theater a ton of times. After your eyes adjust you can see. Sure it would be difficult to shoot well but if a guy walked up your aisle shooting the notion you would have little chance to hit him without killing tons of innocent people is a joke.

How many times have you been tear gassed? Your eyes adjust to that?

Also though saying it would always end better if citizens were armed is also not correct. You can't predict things like that. Sometimes it would end better sometimes it wouldn't.

I love how Houghtam says because he worked in a theater he knows how it would turn out is pretty funny.

Which one of us has filed police and incident reports on multiple occasions, one being when a fire extinguisher was released during a showing, two being brawls one of which which resulted in multiple innocent people being injured?

Here's a clue...




i worked at a bank does that mean i know how to make sure a bank robbery is safer? no it doesn't.
In bold.

Yes, I would say I know exactly what the conditions in a movie theater with poor visibility are, and how easily it is for someone to get injured in a situation like that. Never mind when two sets of bullets start to fly.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 07:39 AM   #121
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
In bold.

Yes, I would say I know exactly what the conditions in a movie theater with poor visibility are, and how easily it is for someone to get injured in a situation like that. Never mind when two sets of bullets start to fly.
Poor visibility?

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 07:41 AM   #122
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
Your eyes aren't going to adjust to the darkness when there's a bright source of light shining in them.
Wrong. This photo taken yesterday, March 25, 2013, inside Theater 9

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 07:44 AM   #123
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Just like there is no evidence that assault rifles are used to commit a high number of murders or crimes in America.

We need to focus on other things like immigration where some good law can help the country grow and be more fair to immigrants.
Giving illegal aliens what they want isn't fair to Americans, and those people aren't immigrants, anyway. Giving them what they want only makes the problem worse, as we saw after the 1986 amnesty which set off a human tidal wave giving us what we have today.

"Assault rifles" are a vague and I'll add MEANINGLESS term since military assault weapons are fully automatic and can fire upwards of 6,000 rounds per minute, not a measly 60.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 07:46 AM   #124
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
Go back to the thread starter,is this the same Heller,as in heller vs dc,that SCOTUS ruled that guns can be regulated & that machine guns & the like can be banned.
"Machine guns" have been banned for 100 years for civilian use.

Instead of admitting that Heller knocked down a ****load of liberal gun regulations in Washington DC, you anti-gun people cling to one small snippet of that ruling you feels gives you license to ban whatever you like.

The Heller ruling ruled that trigger lock laws are unconstitutional. You can't ban willy-nilly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 07:50 AM   #125
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
LMAO So when this place plays a movie, they keep the house lights up and dim the screen eh?

Jesus you are a moron. Do you not realize that the lighting conditions at work before and after the movie are nothing like the lighting conditions DURING the movie? Do you not understand the basic biology in play of being in a darkened room staring at a bright light source?

Your "point" has been ripped to shreds kid.
OH clearly.

  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:36 AM.


Denver Broncos