America's Gun Violence

Thirty Bills Unpaid · May 2016

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

show previous quotes
Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
I'm with Callen. Completely against random checkpoints. I see it as a violation of the 4th amendment and has no place in this country. It is a completely fascist notion. I understand that the Supremes made it legal in 1990, but it was a hotly debated issue back then and I completely disagree with their ruling that it isn't a violation of a persons protection against illegal search and seizure.Thankfully the Supremes left it up to states to decide, and I live in a state that doesn't allow it.
How does it violate your 4th amendment right by making sure you're not drunk? Are they searching your car? Are they breaking into your car? Most check points simply ask for your license and registration, ask you a couple of questions and that's it. All of which are perfectly legal.
On a public road no less.

If they're coming into your house and inspecting your business without due cause... I get it, but this isn't the case.

By the same logic... if trying to safeguard the roads with periodic road checks for drunkards is a violation of personal rights... isn't safeguarding airports or concerts with screening a violation of personal rights and freedoms as well? These security checkpoints are even more invasive.

Yes? No?

jeffbr · May 2016

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

show previous quotes
Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
I'm with Callen. Completely against random checkpoints. I see it as a violation of the 4th amendment and has no place in this country. It is a completely fascist notion. I understand that the Supremes made it legal in 1990, but it was a hotly debated issue back then and I completely disagree with their ruling that it isn't a violation of a persons protection against illegal search and seizure.Thankfully the Supremes left it up to states to decide, and I live in a state that doesn't allow it.
How does it violate your 4th amendment right by making sure you're not drunk? Are they searching your car? Are they breaking into your car? Most check points simply ask for your license and registration, ask you a couple of questions and that's it. All of which are perfectly legal.
On a public road no less.

If they're coming into your house and inspecting your business without due cause... I get it, but this isn't the case.

By the same logic... if trying to safeguard the roads with periodic road checks for drunkards is a violation of personal rights... isn't safeguarding airports or concerts with screening a violation of personal rights and freedoms as well? These security checkpoints are even more invasive.
Yes? No?

A concert is a private event, and a venue can certainly restrict access. Even a concert in a publicly owned building is a private event. So they can do as they like. TSA and border checkpoints are allowed searches without probable cause, so it is just a fact of life. I don't like it, but it is what it is. But just because Homeland Security can do this, doesn't mean I want general law enforcement to have the same abilities for whatever their pet issues are.

jeffbr · May 2016

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

show previous quotes
jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
I'm with Callen. Completely against random checkpoints. I see it as a violation of the 4th amendment and has no place in this country. It is a completely fascist notion. I understand that the Supremes made it legal in 1990, but it was a hotly debated issue back then and I completely disagree with their ruling that it isn't a violation of a persons protection against illegal search and seizure.Thankfully the Supremes left it up to states to decide, and I live in a state that doesn't allow it.
How does it violate your 4th amendment right by making sure you're not drunk? Are they searching your car? Are they breaking into your car? Most check points simply ask for your license and registration, ask you a couple of questions and that's it. All of which are perfectly legal.
Sounds pretty cut and dry. Except it isn't. Prior to the Supremes ruling, Michigan's supreme court ruled in favor of the defendants and believed their rights were violated. The Supremes weren't unanimous either. So there are plenty of constitutional and legal scholars who found these unwarranted stops troublesome. I agree with them. People who think it is OK to stop people without cause are the same people with little regard for liberty who supported the Patriot Act. I understand there are plenty of people around who don't value liberty, and will put that aside in under the guise of "safety". I just don't happen to be one of them.
That's isn't true. I have been against the Patriot act since it's inception. You are on public roads. Having a license is not a right. Being unanimous really doesn't matter. Roe vs wade wasn't unanimous.

I haven't heard of a reason why getting asked for your license is a violation of your 4th amendment right.
Being stopped without cause it where the violation starts. It is essentially a seizure. You are not free to go until the cop tells you you are. You and your vehicle are being held without probable cause. Lots wrong with this. The majority opinion even acknowledges that, but says the minor inconvenience/intrusion on sober drivers was offset by the needs of the state. Again, if you're fine with the police randomly stopping and detaining people without cause in the name of safety and security, you're in good company. But I am not comfortable with this, and agree with the Michigan courts and the dissenters on the Supreme Court.
I don't know how they are doing it in Michigan, but I've never been detained while at a checkpoint. I'm guessing neither have you. You stop, give the guy your license, answer a couple of questions and you go. It never happens the way you describe it. You're not being detained. Nor are you being searched.
Perhaps you don't understand what detained means. If you pull up, are you free to just continue on, or do they prohibit you from leaving until you've complied with their orders? What happens when you try to leave without their permission?

You are absolutely being detained until they're satisfied and allow you to leave.
It's not a power trip though. It's a service. Most roadblocks I've gone through have been painless. Actually... make that all roadblocks.

I've been through painless roadblocks/check points as well. I haven't had any bad experience with them. But I am fundamentally against these tactics based on their apparent presumption of guilt, and on their ability to detain without probable cause. These checkpoints may not be invasive at all, but the erosion of privacy and liberty is real, and as we've seen with things like the Patriot Act, when you give the government rights and powers they were expressly not granted, they'll grab them and keep pushing harder for more.

Degeneratefk · May 2016

jeffbr said:

show previous quotes
Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
I'm with Callen. Completely against random checkpoints. I see it as a violation of the 4th amendment and has no place in this country. It is a completely fascist notion. I understand that the Supremes made it legal in 1990, but it was a hotly debated issue back then and I completely disagree with their ruling that it isn't a violation of a persons protection against illegal search and seizure.Thankfully the Supremes left it up to states to decide, and I live in a state that doesn't allow it.
How does it violate your 4th amendment right by making sure you're not drunk? Are they searching your car? Are they breaking into your car? Most check points simply ask for your license and registration, ask you a couple of questions and that's it. All of which are perfectly legal.
Sounds pretty cut and dry. Except it isn't. Prior to the Supremes ruling, Michigan's supreme court ruled in favor of the defendants and believed their rights were violated. The Supremes weren't unanimous either. So there are plenty of constitutional and legal scholars who found these unwarranted stops troublesome. I agree with them. People who think it is OK to stop people without cause are the same people with little regard for liberty who supported the Patriot Act. I understand there are plenty of people around who don't value liberty, and will put that aside in under the guise of "safety". I just don't happen to be one of them.
That's isn't true. I have been against the Patriot act since it's inception. You are on public roads. Having a license is not a right. Being unanimous really doesn't matter. Roe vs wade wasn't unanimous.

I haven't heard of a reason why getting asked for your license is a violation of your 4th amendment right.
Being stopped without cause it where the violation starts. It is essentially a seizure. You are not free to go until the cop tells you you are. You and your vehicle are being held without probable cause. Lots wrong with this. The majority opinion even acknowledges that, but says the minor inconvenience/intrusion on sober drivers was offset by the needs of the state. Again, if you're fine with the police randomly stopping and detaining people without cause in the name of safety and security, you're in good company. But I am not comfortable with this, and agree with the Michigan courts and the dissenters on the Supreme Court.
I don't know how they are doing it in Michigan, but I've never been detained while at a checkpoint. I'm guessing neither have you. You stop, give the guy your license, answer a couple of questions and you go. It never happens the way you describe it. You're not being detained. Nor are you being searched.
Perhaps you don't understand what detained means. If you pull up, are you free to just continue on, or do they prohibit you from leaving until you've complied with their orders? What happens when you try to leave without their permission?

You are absolutely being detained until they're satisfied and allow you to leave.
It's not a power trip though. It's a service. Most roadblocks I've gone through have been painless. Actually... make that all roadblocks.
I've been through painless roadblocks/check points as well. I haven't had any bad experience with them. But I am fundamentally against these tactics based on their apparent presumption of guilt, and on their ability to detain without probable cause. These checkpoints may not be invasive at all, but the erosion of privacy and liberty is real, and as we've seen with things like the Patriot Act, when you give the government rights and powers they were expressly not granted, they'll grab them and keep pushing harder for more.

You admit they are not at all invasive yet still think your 4th amendment rightso are being violated because you think you're presumed guilty simply because the road block is there?

That, I guess is the difference in opinion. I don't believe you are being stopped and presumed guilty.

jeffbr · May 2016

I'm being stopped without probable cause. That is enough of a red flag for me to be opposed to that tactic. I know i draw my line in a different place than many of you. I'm sure you have a line as well. We'll likely just have to disagree about where that line should be drawn. I understand why the checkpoints exist and that their intentions are likely good. I detest drunk drivers, and would like them off the road. In my state we don't do the checkpoint thing, but the state patrol does have stepped up DUI patrols, and will pull over people who exhibit behavior consistent with impairment. That is the kind of law enforcement I support 100%.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · May 2016

Jeff...

I do hear what you are saying, but ultimately (in my opinion)... certain levels of trust are afforded in the daily business of life.

Just like we trust the airline pilot to safely fly us to our destination, or our anesthesiologist to properly dose us... it's my opinion we afford the police the latitude to do the jobs we ask them to do.

eddiec · May 2016

jeffbr said:
I'm being stopped without probable cause. That is enough of a red flag for me to be opposed to that tactic. I know i draw my line in a different place than many of you. I'm sure you have a line as well. We'll likely just have to disagree about where that line should be drawn. I understand why the checkpoints exist and that their intentions are likely good. I detest drunk drivers, and would like them off the road. In my state we don't do the checkpoint thing, but the state patrol does have stepped up DUI patrols, and will pull over people who exhibit behavior consistent with impairment. That is the kind of law enforcement I support 100%.

These aren't just checkpoints to make sure your paperwork is in order. We're talking about one specific area and that is a DUI checkpoint. Having these are more of a deterrent than a detention protocol. In an area where there often checkpoints it definitely helps in combatting drunk drivers. If you look at it as trying to protect innocent people from being killed by some drunk asshole it changes the perspective a little.

I get where you're coming from and I know people love to throw in the 'where does it stop?' line but I think in this case it is a necessity. Out of all the ridiculous restrictions and laws we deal with I can let this one slide because I think it serves a greater good. I was talking with an Italian guy recently who spent a year living in New Jersey. The biggest thing he couldn't understand was how there could be a law against having a beer at the beach. As he said, 'It's the beach, that's what you do when you go to the beach.' That pisses me off more than a DUI checkpoint.

callen · May 2016

Degeneratefk said:

show previous quotes
callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.

Are you serious about living in a place where the police can stop you at anytime and fuck with you??? REALLY? Like in China and North Korea?

Cops pull everyone over Into a Church parking lot, file them through check point. Herding the sheep. And many just say bahhhhhh.

Fk that.

and the dwi thing so many are willing to give up their liberty, there's already an avenue, .."probable cause".

............fk imagine being a minority in fkn South Carolina coming up to a road block.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · May 2016

callen said:

show previous quotes
Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
Are you serious about living in a place where the police can stop you at anytime and fuck with you??? REALLY? Like in China and North Korea?

Cops pull everyone over Into a Church parking lot, file them through check point. Herding the sheep. And many just say bahhhhhh.

Fk that.

and the dwi thing so many are willing to give up their liberty, there's already an avenue, .."probable cause".

............fk imagine being a minority in fkn South Carolina coming up to a road block.

That comment was like... 20 days ago, man.

Degeneratefk · May 2016

callen said:

show previous quotes
Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
Are you serious about living in a place where the police can stop you at anytime and fuck with you??? REALLY? Like in China and North Korea?

Cops pull everyone over Into a Church parking lot, file them through check point. Herding the sheep. And many just say bahhhhhh.

Fk that.

and the dwi thing so many are willing to give up their liberty, there's already an avenue, .."probable cause".

............fk imagine being a minority in fkn South Carolina coming up to a road block.

I've never said racism doesn't still exist, especially in my,state. I've never been through a checkpoint and been "herded" through a parking lot. Every single time ive been through one, the entire process took no more than 5 minutes. Seems like a small price to pay in an effort to decrease DUIs. But what do I know? I've only been a fireman for 13 years. I guess I haven't seen enough death yet directly caused by impaired driving.

catefrances · May 2016

jeffbr said:

show previous quotes
Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
I'm with Callen. Completely against random checkpoints. I see it as a violation of the 4th amendment and has no place in this country. It is a completely fascist notion. I understand that the Supremes made it legal in 1990, but it was a hotly debated issue back then and I completely disagree with their ruling that it isn't a violation of a persons protection against illegal search and seizure.Thankfully the Supremes left it up to states to decide, and I live in a state that doesn't allow it.

a fascist notion is murdering 6 million Jews just cause.

we have random breath tests(RBT) here in Australia. no one think its a violation of any right. driving whilst over the legal limit is a crime here. isn't it over there?.
if you make the stupid decision to get behind the wheel of a car drunk, putting not only your life but also the lives of others in danger then stiff shit for you if you get caught. better than having to inform ones next of kin youre dead cause you're stupid or informing someone else their child/father/husband/whatever is dead cause some arsehole decided driving whilst drunk was a good idea.

callen · May 2016

Degeneratefk said:

show previous quotes
callen said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
Are you serious about living in a place where the police can stop you at anytime and fuck with you??? REALLY? Like in China and North Korea?

Cops pull everyone over Into a Church parking lot, file them through check point. Herding the sheep. And many just say bahhhhhh.

Fk that.

and the dwi thing so many are willing to give up their liberty, there's already an avenue, .."probable cause".

............fk imagine being a minority in fkn South Carolina coming up to a road block.

I've never said racism doesn't still exist, especially in my,state. I've never been through a checkpoint and been "herded" through a parking lot. Every single time ive been through one, the entire process took no more than 5 minutes. Seems like a small price to pay in an effort to decrease DUIs. But what do I know? I've only been a fireman for 13 years. I guess I haven't seen enough death yet directly caused by impaired driving.

Horrible price to pay. Giving up your rights as a free human.

callen · May 2016

catefrances said:

show previous quotes
jeffbr said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
I'm with Callen. Completely against random checkpoints. I see it as a violation of the 4th amendment and has no place in this country. It is a completely fascist notion. I understand that the Supremes made it legal in 1990, but it was a hotly debated issue back then and I completely disagree with their ruling that it isn't a violation of a persons protection against illegal search and seizure.Thankfully the Supremes left it up to states to decide, and I live in a state that doesn't allow it.
a fascist notion is murdering 6 million Jews just cause.

we have random breath tests(RBT) here in Australia. no one think its a violation of any right. driving whilst over the legal limit is a crime here. isn't it over there?.
if you make the stupid decision to get behind the wheel of a car drunk, putting not only your life but also the lives of others in danger then stiff shit for you if you get caught. better than having to inform ones next of kin youre dead cause you're stupid or informing someone else their child/father/husband/whatever is dead cause some arsehole decided driving whilst drunk was a good idea.

Sad sad sad.

Willing to give up a fundamental right so easily.

And we wonder how Hitler pulled it off.

mickeyrat · May 2016

so a license and a car are a right? is that right? musta missed that in reading the bill of rights.

PJPOWER · May 2016

mickeyrat said:
so a license and a car are a right? is that right? musta missed that in reading the bill of rights.

Well, they are personal property, falling under illegal search and seizure...
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/search-and-seizure-and-the-fourth-amendment.html

I guess you could argue that they are homes on wheels as well if you want to jump back into the 2nd Amendment and discuss the castle doctrine rulings.

mickeyrat · May 2016

and you must follow direction of traffic control devices. BITCH all you like , the
courts have ruled

pay attention to news cuz they must be announced. you can then exercise ylur free will to avoid th accordingly.

Degeneratefk · May 2016

callen said:

show previous quotes
Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
Are you serious about living in a place where the police can stop you at anytime and fuck with you??? REALLY? Like in China and North Korea?

Cops pull everyone over Into a Church parking lot, file them through check point. Herding the sheep. And many just say bahhhhhh.

Fk that.

and the dwi thing so many are willing to give up their liberty, there's already an avenue, .."probable cause".

............fk imagine being a minority in fkn South Carolina coming up to a road block.

I've never said racism doesn't still exist, especially in my,state. I've never been through a checkpoint and been "herded" through a parking lot. Every single time ive been through one, the entire process took no more than 5 minutes. Seems like a small price to pay in an effort to decrease DUIs. But what do I know? I've only been a fireman for 13 years. I guess I haven't seen enough death yet directly caused by impaired driving.
Horrible price to pay. Giving up your rights as a free human.

I disagree. I'm not giving up any rights by complying with a checkpoint. If you do not want to drive through one, you can certainly take another route. There may be exceptions, but most checkpoints are publicly advertised in newspapers and county websites

PJPOWER · May 2016

mickeyrat said:
and you must follow direction of traffic control devices. BITCH all you like , the
courts have ruled

pay attention to news cuz they must be announced. you can then exercise ylur free will to avoid th accordingly.

As with the 2nd Amendment!!! Where have I been, when did this topic become about traffic stops?

callen · May 2016

mickeyrat said:
so a license and a car are a right? is that right? musta missed that in reading the bill of rights.

The right to not have another human being impede on your freedom! Being able to force you to do something. Take your time. Resources And that of the police. Directed by government, politicians!

callen · May 2016

Degeneratefk said:

show previous quotes
callen said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

Degeneratefk said:

callen said:

eddiec said:

mace1229 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
F**k.

Alcohol kills people at times. This is true. Fat kills people too. So does a sedentary lifestyle. Don't forget the f**king sun too- bastard star that strikes us with cancer. And cars... the big comparison for gun strokers.

Big f**king deal. None of the above items have been designed for the purpose of killing things. Every death that results from the discharge of a firearm marks an event where the gun- as a tool- has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed.

Stop trying to weakly validate guns and their rightful place in society by comparing them to esophagus sized wieners that people choke on and the like. If gun lovers would just say, "F**k you guys. I f**king love my military style assault rifle and shooting the shit out of my empty beer cans up at the landfill. You'll have to pry my 'fancy' gun from my cold dead hands before I give up shooting beer cans at the landfill... f**kers"... I'd have more respect.

Stop trying to convince intelligent people that there is a reasonable argument. There is not. It's not even close. It's not even remotely close. But as I said... most people aren't very smart and most people are very selfish: gun lovers do not need to fear having their guns taken from them. Instead, they can continue to fear hostile governments with devious plans and home invaders that are plotting an invasion of their home likely at this minute.
In my first post I said I wasn't trying to win anyone over. And I did say I shoot oranges and apples that are rotting at my parents orchard and hope to never shoot at anything else. More fun than empty beer cans, and it even helps with the compost.

I was merely pointing out all the attention that guns receive and a major topic at every debate. Why not spend some of that focus on something that kills even more, like drunk driving? Alcohol may not be designed to kill, but more innocent children die from drunk drivers than as a result from a homicide where a gun was used regardless of that fact. Alcohol is designed to impair judgment, and every time someone gets into a car and kills a 5 year old child because they were drunk and couldn't make the right judgment, the alcohol "has performed admirably and served its purpose exactly as designed." What difference does the purpose make? I think a ban on alcohol is extreme, but when was the last time you heard any politician talk about reducing DUI's? But they can't talk for 5 minutes without bringing up guns.

We can agree on one thing at least....That Bastard Star of ours!
When people see a DUI checkpoint most people are glad the law is being enforced (except for the idiot who had too many and decided to drive).

If police enforced gun laws like they do alcohol laws people would bitch that they are trying to take their guns away.

And Most people are sheep. I don't want to live in a police state and NO human has the right to impead my travels on public lands.
Are you serious? So you're against random checkpoints in high DUI areas? That's far from living in a police state.

And yes, the police do have the right to impede your travel if you are driving by car. A license isn't a right.
Are you serious about living in a place where the police can stop you at anytime and fuck with you??? REALLY? Like in China and North Korea?

Cops pull everyone over Into a Church parking lot, file them through check point. Herding the sheep. And many just say bahhhhhh.

Fk that.

and the dwi thing so many are willing to give up their liberty, there's already an avenue, .."probable cause".

............fk imagine being a minority in fkn South Carolina coming up to a road block.

I've never said racism doesn't still exist, especially in my,state. I've never been through a checkpoint and been "herded" through a parking lot. Every single time ive been through one, the entire process took no more than 5 minutes. Seems like a small price to pay in an effort to decrease DUIs. But what do I know? I've only been a fireman for 13 years. I guess I haven't seen enough death yet directly caused by impaired driving.
Horrible price to pay. Giving up your rights as a free human.
I disagree. I'm not giving up any rights by complying with a checkpoint. If you do not want to drive through one, you can certainly take another route. There may be exceptions, but most checkpoints are publicly advertised in newspapers and county websites

Of course you are. You are giving the government the right to stop you. Search your shit. You gave up your freedoms while not realizing it and gave the "authorities" power to interfere with me.

America's Gun Violence

Comments

Quick Links

Categories