Johnny Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 You know, sometimes you think that nothing will ever surprise you anymore. And you're always wrong. So fucking wrong. What the fuck did I just watch? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 I seriously thought it was a parody until that guy started narrating at the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 So did I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luftwaffles Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 Well, that was... enlightening? I mean, the ideas are nothing new to me, it's just the presentation with the cop winking etc that surprised me. And the Windows Movie Maker text effects never fail to dissapoint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurial Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 (edited) Edited July 18, 2012 by Dr.Krieger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 I think I just got more dumber from watching that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madbassman39 Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 (edited) Uggh, this probably belongs in another thread but I'm going to say it anyways... can't we just let same sex couples marry and move on? It doesn't affect America any more than heterosexual couple marrying, and it makes more people happy in the long run Edited July 18, 2012 by madbassman39 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterDex Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 (edited) Uggh, this probably belongs in another thread but I'm going to say it anyways... can't we just let same sex couples marry and move on? It doesn't affect America any more than heterosexual couple marrying, and it makes more people happy in the long run But then you corrupt the sanctity of marriage! These people who are against same sex marriage really need to open a book and do some research on why marriage exists. It's a legal/political contract, always has been, always will be. All this highfalutin bullshit about the sanctity of marriage and how it must be between a man and a woman needs to stop, if even just to save my face the multiple facepalms. Edited July 18, 2012 by MasterDex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 That was incredible. It went off on such a bizarre tangent. What on earth is Ron Perlman doing appearing in misguided political films that can't even manage to borrow a boom mic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/19/pentagon-lets-service-members-march-in-uniform-at-gay-pride-parade-for-first/ w00t! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Why do guys still have laws that allow people to own guns? usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/20/12850048-14-shot-dead-at-dark-knight-rises-screening-in-aurora-colorado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted July 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Why do guys still have laws that allow people to own guns? usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/20/12850048-14-shot-dead-at-dark-knight-rises-screening-in-aurora-colorado Because people are idiots, and I guarantee you that people are going to blame the movie instead of the guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 It's a premier, there's not much to go on for inspiration than if it was done a couple weeks in. If was to be a stadium blown up then sure, but apart from the fateful mugging I don't think batman series has much to go on for inspiring mass shooting at a cinema (batman himself is pretty opposed to guns) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Why do guys still have laws that allow people to own guns? usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/20/12850048-14-shot-dead-at-dark-knight-rises-screening-in-aurora-colorado A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 That would be the law itself, not the reason why it is still around centuries later. Not like anyone follows it properly anyway. Just the "bear arms" bit. Don't see any militias maintaining security or freedoms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) The reason it's still around is that it's really damn hard to change the constitution. And for some reason people are really hyper-paranoid about a police state, and think that the only thing preventing it from coming about is that they have their guns. And honestly I think that the second amendment is a large part of the reason people are so attached to owning guns: being part of the original bill of rights it's seen as a really core American value, so it's kind of reinforced itself. *Edit* - For the edification of those who don't know the process, in order to change the constitution one of two things must happen: 1) Congress passes a proposed amendment through both houses with at least a 2/3 majority. Then 3/4 of the state legislatures have ratify the proposed amendment. They could also use special state conventions instead of the normal state legislatures, but that's only been done once. 2) 2/3 of the state legislatures request Congress to call a constitutional convention to propose the amendment, then 3/4 of the states have to ratify the amendment. Edited July 20, 2012 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Pro-Gun folk always focus on the second part. It seems to get totally forgotten that it is a conditional right. I'm pretty sure that America, despite its problems is at a stage now where a "well regulated militia" is no longer require to maintain freedom in the US. There is a civilian police force and a sizeable regular army to fulfil those roles. Not to mention the fact that describing the gun-toting lunatics that tend to make the press these days a "well regulated" anything is a bit of a stretch. It's almost as ridiculous as the law that still requires all British men to attend archery practice on a Sunday. Once upon a time it was important that everyone could shoot a bow. Having not faced a serious attempted invasion for the past 60 plus years (never mind one that could be repelled by bows) the law is pretty pointless. Also, if the average American citizen really believes that they could, armed or otherwise, stand up to their own army without being utterly crushed then they need to take another look at the hardware they'll be facing. It's a silly silly rule that should have been changed a long time ago. And that's not just an attempt to soften you up for re-colonisation. Promise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 A nutcase is a nutcase. I am reasoning this out from how he was found disarmed a little bit away from the theater. He didn't seem to be wanting to suicide by cop. So he has some motive, however crazy. I just hope its not a stupid motive like some people are wondering about the Bain Captial/Bane thing. I will be pissed if it was for some stupid shit like that. Lastly he most likely would of done it anyways, regardless of what the gun laws are, with a homemade bomb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 @Thursday: the prevailing legal interpretation though is that "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" is just their justification for the rule, and that only the second part really has legal effect. I agree that it's completely pointless in this day and age, unless they decide that it also protects your right to have a surface-to-air missile in your backyard and an anti-tank gun in the garage, but it says what it says and it's a bitch to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurial Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 It doesn't matter if guns are illegal for civilians to own criminals will always find a way to get them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Thing is though you're not a criminal until you use that gun to kill someone. A perfectly normal person with at most a bit of a mark on his school report walks into a perfectly normal and (due to 2nd amendment) legal gun store and purchases a device constructed for the aim of killing people. This person then walks into a cinema and shoots and kills a punch of people. Now he is a criminal. The reason criminals can find it so easy to find these guns is because the law means there's plenty of legal places set up to go and buy them. Over here (and most other countries with restrictive gun laws) you can't just pop into Asda and stock up on ammo like you can in the US. Yes people that absolutely do want a gun will potentially be able to get their hands on them. But people that are yet-to-be-criminals it's a bit harder to actually cross into the line of becoming a criminal if they can't pick up and own a gun so easily. The chances of me going and shooting people when angry is next to zero given I don't have a gun in my bedside table. I'd have to really go out of my way to get hold of a gun, and 99% of the time it's really not worth it. In fact it's the same with the bomb point too, since both require much more effort than just having the gun in the first place. @TME: Surely removing the amendment would be on par in difficulty with the process that made it in the first place? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luftwaffles Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 I'm not in favor of removing the second amendment, as I think it's been an integral part of our society for so long no amount of reason or logic is going to get it to go away. Like it or not, it's one of the things the US was founded directly on. I am in favor of much, much stricter laws when buying guns, though. I think it varies from state to state, but a week long waiting period and a small background check just isn't enough in my opinion when selling a device designed to cause bodily harm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 @TME: Surely removing the amendment would be on par in difficulty with the process that made it in the first place? Well the process itself isn't any harder, until you take into account that there are 50 states now instead of 13, so you have to get 38 states to approve the change rather than only 10. Not to mention the fact that like Spork says it's so ingrained into our culture now that there would be massive amounts of resistance to repealing it. It's part of the original Bill of Rights, and therefore fairly sacrosanct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted July 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 I'm not in favor of removing the second amendment, as I think it's been an integral part of our society for so long no amount of reason or logic is going to get it to go away. Like it or not, it's one of the things the US was founded directly on. Honestly I can't understand not being in favor of something just because you see it as unlikely to happen. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.