Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

If only anyone in the Navy had a gun...Follow

#77 Sep 18 2013 at 11:30 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Starbucks CEO publicly announced that today that guns were not welcome in their stores.

How can you enjoy a cup of coffee without the peace of mind that comes with a concealed weapon?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#78 Sep 18 2013 at 11:36 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,673 posts
Starbucks doesn't do coffee, they do microwaved ice cream. And it's probably a good choice by the CEO, since the few times I've gone into one I've felt like shooting the barista.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#79 Sep 18 2013 at 11:49 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Starbucks CEO publicly announced that today that guns were not welcome in their stores.


I don't know for a fact, but I'm going to assume that there isn't a tremendous amount of overlap between Starbucks customer base and terrified old white guys or "libertarians".
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#80 Sep 18 2013 at 11:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Starbucks doesn't do coffee, they do microwaved ice cream. And it's probably a good choice by the CEO, since the few times I've gone into one I've felt like shooting the barista.
Not the barista so much as the 5 people in front of you who want a slim double-shotted something with extra this, hold the whatever, with something whipped and 5 other exemptions. You're only there because of your wife, so you can't complain, and end up waiting for 5 minutes to order a 'small coffee' in which case the barista asks you which of their 4 brews you prefer and fantasize about hurting something cute.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#81 Sep 18 2013 at 12:31 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,855 posts
Elinda wrote:
Starbucks CEO publicly announced that today that guns were not welcome in their stores.

How can you enjoy a cup of coffee without the peace of mind that comes with a concealed weapon?


Tennesseans announce plans to boycott Starbucks and to have gun sales outside Starbucks stores in protest.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#82 Sep 18 2013 at 12:35 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,673 posts
Weren't they already boycotting Starbucks over *** people?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#83 Sep 18 2013 at 12:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
[A crazy obsessive person is going to find a way to accomplish their goals one way or another. Should we ban propane tanks and gasolene? Maybe we should ban aluminum so no one can file it into aluminum powder? Of ban fuel oil because someone could make a bomb out of it. Maybe ban containers with lids, or clocks that could be used as detonators?

Terrible, lazy argument. Might as well say "They're going to kill someone anyway if they really want to so why not sell RPGs, .50 cal machine guns and sarin gas at Walmart? The lack of those won't stop anyone from just knifing people to death."
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84 Sep 18 2013 at 12:46 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
America runs on Dunkin.

Here's a bit from the letter posted on Starbucks website.....
Starbuck CEO Shultz wrote:
Recently, however, we’ve seen the “open carry” debate become increasingly uncivil and, in some cases, even threatening. Pro-gun activists have used our stores as a political stage for media events misleadingly called “Starbucks Appreciation Days” that disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of “open carry.” To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores. Some anti-gun activists have also played a role in ratcheting up the rhetoric and friction, including soliciting and confronting our customers and partners.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#85 Sep 18 2013 at 12:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Who needs guns when a cup of hot coffee is a deadly weapon? If you really wanted to kill someone, you'd just 3rd degree burn their crotch to death.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#86 Sep 18 2013 at 12:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
[A crazy obsessive person is going to find a way to accomplish their goals one way or another. Should we ban propane tanks and gasolene? Maybe we should ban aluminum so no one can file it into aluminum powder? Of ban fuel oil because someone could make a bomb out of it. Maybe ban containers with lids, or clocks that could be used as detonators?

Terrible, lazy argument. Might as well say "They're going to kill someone anyway if they really want to so why not sell RPGs, .50 cal machine guns and sarin gas at Walmart? The lack of those won't stop anyone from just knifing people to death."

Yeah, the thing is psychotic behavior is just that. A crazily obsessed person that is stymied by a regulation may indeed be put off long enough for the mood pendulum to swing, or long enough for someone to question their actions, or long enough for the meds to kick in or whatever. Every roadblock put in the way is going to lessen the over-all chance of someone successfully carrying through with an active shooter event.



Edited, Sep 18th 2013 8:50pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#87 Sep 18 2013 at 1:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
Elinda wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
[A crazy obsessive person is going to find a way to accomplish their goals one way or another. Should we ban propane tanks and gasolene? Maybe we should ban aluminum so no one can file it into aluminum powder? Of ban fuel oil because someone could make a bomb out of it. Maybe ban containers with lids, or clocks that could be used as detonators?

Terrible, lazy argument. Might as well say "They're going to kill someone anyway if they really want to so why not sell RPGs, .50 cal machine guns and sarin gas at Walmart? The lack of those won't stop anyone from just knifing people to death."

Yeah, the thing is psychotic behavior is just that. A crazily obsessed person that is stymied by a regulation may indeed be put off long enough for the mood pendulum to swing, or long enough for someone to question their actions, or long enough for the meds to kick in or whatever. Every roadblock put in the way is going to lessen the over-all chance of someone successfully carrying through with an active shooter event.
Or realistically you probably have both types of people. Those who would kill you right now if they only had a gun, but tomorrow won't care worth a thing. Then there are those who are determined to die and take as many people with them as possible. You can stop the first kind, but not the second. Both sides of the debate can point to different kinds of nut jobs that back up their argument, and ignore the cases in-between those two extremes.

I'd rather spend money supporting mental health stuff in this country and try to nip some of the crazy in the bud. Either way though.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#88 Sep 18 2013 at 1:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
someproteinguy wrote:
I'd rather spend money supporting mental health stuff in this country and try to nip some of the crazy in the bud. Either way though.

I'd rather do both. Help those who need it and make it more difficult for the others to kill people. I'm just all over the place!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#89 Sep 18 2013 at 1:04 PM Rating: Good
******
49,673 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Then there are those who are determined to die and take as many people with them as possible.
How about those of us that have no intention of dying but plan on taking as many people with us when the time comes around?

Edited, Sep 18th 2013 3:04pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#90 Sep 18 2013 at 1:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I feel that the notion that people will just make their own guns in any significant quantity (esp. compared to manufactured weapons) is a tad overblown anyway. Tell someone to build their own computer and they freak out and buy a shitty Dell instead. ****, the other day I was talking to someone with literally no clue how to check their tire pressure -- but I'm supposed to believe that they'll become Vulcan at the forge next time they get a hankerin' to shoot someone.

Just my own impression but I'm personally confident that shootings by people milling their own weapons or building it IKEA style would be far below the current people using traditionally purchased firearms.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#91 Sep 18 2013 at 1:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
Jophiel wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
I'd rather spend money supporting mental health stuff in this country and try to nip some of the crazy in the bud. Either way though.

I'd rather do both. Help those who need it and make it more difficult for the others to kill people. I'm just all over the place!
Focus focus focus, typical liberal trying to fix everything at once. Smiley: disappointed

Just a personal opinion that there would better better bang for the buck by improving the mental health side, plus you'd be adding other benefits to society beyond just not having people killing people. But I don't have a problem with having guns around in general, even if it does make me a bit uneasy at times.

lolgaxe wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Then there are those who are determined to die and take as many people with them as possible.
How about those of us that have no intention of dying but plan on taking as many people with us when the time comes around?
You'll use a IED and set it off remotely, of course. Smiley: wink
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#92 Sep 18 2013 at 3:19 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,855 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Weren't they already boycotting Starbucks over *** people?


I thought there were giving Chick-Fil-A a handjob for being anti-***?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#93 Sep 18 2013 at 4:35 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Great. Then we're done, right? We've decided that the cost to put sufficient background checks in place to ensure that mentally disturbed people who hear voices and have black outs and shoot things can't get a security clearance to work at a military base isn't worth it.

Well, you know, in an ideal world, we'd have that level of background check applied to people who buy guns...


You understand that your own argument applies here too, right? He wasn't convicted of any felony, thus could purchase a gun. He wasn't committed to any institution, thus could purchase a gun. What changes to our background check process do you propose that would stop a guy who had no felonies on his record and was not institutionalized or put on a "unstable" list of some kind that would have prevented this?

None, right?

Quote:
... since the number of mass murders by contractors and the number of mass murders by contractors who own guns seems to overlap 100%


But the number of contractors who own guns does not overlap 100% with the number of mass murders by contractors, does it? That's a silly correlation. There's also a 100% overlap between mass murders by contractors and mass murders by contractors who ate food in the previous few days. So clearly we should ban food! Yeah. Dumb logic Smash.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#94 Sep 18 2013 at 4:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
But the number of contractors who own guns does not overlap 100% with the number of mass murders by contractors, does it?

Can you name some mass murders by contractors which didn't involve guns?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#95 Sep 18 2013 at 5:02 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts


You understand that your own argument applies here too, right? He wasn't convicted of any felony, thus could purchase a gun. He wasn't committed to any institution, thus could purchase a gun. What changes to our background check process do you propose that would stop a guy who had no felonies on his record and was not institutionalized or put on a "unstable" list of some kind that would have prevented this?


Would a waiting period have stopped it?

But the number of contractors who own guns does not overlap 100% with the number of mass murders by contractors, does it? That's a silly correlation. There's also a 100% overlap between mass murders by contractors and mass murders by contractors who ate food in the previous few days. So clearly we should ban food! Yeah. Dumb logic Smash.

I was going to explain this and how Hannah spotted the problem with your post, but I decided it would be better to see if you could catch up to an 8 year old. Good luck.

Edited, Sep 18th 2013 7:04pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#96 Sep 18 2013 at 5:09 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Gbaji: Serious question you may or may not have answered previously, if you have, I apologize....

Where do you think the the "limit" should be on personal arms. Is it ok for Random Citizen to own a machine gun? An RPG? Hand grenades? Mortars? Assuming the current regulation scheme isn't perfect, where should it stop. If anywhere. Nuclear weapons?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#97 Sep 18 2013 at 5:26 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
But the number of contractors who own guns does not overlap 100% with the number of mass murders by contractors, does it?

Can you name some mass murders by contractors which didn't involve guns?


I can name a lot of contractors who own guns who didn't commit mass murder though. If there was a 100% overlap between them, then 100% of all contractors with guns would commit mass murder. But that's not the case, right?

Similarly (and I thought this wasn't so hard to figure out), while 100% of mass shooters also ate food within a few days of committing their crimes, 100% of people who've eaten food within a few days do not commit mass shootings. See how that works? It's bad logic. Hopefully, I don't have to explain why.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#98 Sep 18 2013 at 5:27 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
I can name a lot of contractors who own guns who didn't commit mass murder though. If there was a 100% overlap between them, then 100% of all contractors with guns would commit mass murder. But that's not the case, right?

Similarly (and I thought this wasn't so hard to figure out), while 100% of mass shooters also ate food within a few days of committing their crimes, 100% of people who've eaten food within a few days do not commit mass shootings. See how that works? It's bad logic. Hopefully, I don't have to explain why.


Weird, the 8 year old got it right away. You still don't see the problem? Hard to fathom.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#99 Sep 18 2013 at 5:32 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
You understand that your own argument applies here too, right? He wasn't convicted of any felony, thus could purchase a gun. He wasn't committed to any institution, thus could purchase a gun. What changes to our background check process do you propose that would stop a guy who had no felonies on his record and was not institutionalized or put on a "unstable" list of some kind that would have prevented this?

Would a waiting period have stopped it?


You tell me. Probably not. People who do these kinds of shootings don't usually do them on a whim (always exceptions I suppose). You don't honestly think that someone who's obsessed with the idea of going out in a blaze of glory and taking as many of his co-workers with him is going to be deterred because he'll have to wait 15 days to do it? It's kind of a "once a lifetime" thing to do, right?

Quote:
But the number of contractors who own guns does not overlap 100% with the number of mass murders by contractors, does it? That's a silly correlation. There's also a 100% overlap between mass murders by contractors and mass murders by contractors who ate food in the previous few days. So clearly we should ban food! Yeah. Dumb logic Smash.

I was going to explain this and how Hannah spotted the problem with your post, but I decided it would be better to see if you could catch up to an 8 year old. Good luck.


Given that it's the exact same problem with the logic in your post, perhaps you should ask yourself why you failed to spot something an 8 year old could see was wrong. You get that the logical structure I just wrote is exactly identical to the one you did, right? Or do you not?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#100 Sep 18 2013 at 5:34 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Given that it's the exact same problem with the logic in your post, perhaps you should ask yourself why you failed to spot something an 8 year old could see was wrong. You get that the logical structure I just wrote is exactly identical to the one you did, right? Or do you not?

Oh, it's not. Do you really not see why? Did they not teach symbolic logic at ITT Tech?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#101 Sep 18 2013 at 5:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I can name a lot of contractors who own guns who didn't commit mass murder though. If there was a 100% overlap between them, then 100% of all contractors with guns would commit mass murder. But that's not the case, right?

But it is the case that 100% of mass murdering contractors were gun owners who used the guns in the execution of their mass murders.

Quote:
Similarly (and I thought this wasn't so hard to figure out), while 100% of mass shooters also ate food within a few days of committing their crimes, 100% of people who've eaten food within a few days do not commit mass shootings. See how that works? It's bad logic. Hopefully, I don't have to explain why.

It's bad logic all right. Too bad I'd probably have to explain why.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 133 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (133)