TBD on Ning

This is number #5 fact according to this acticle...and somehow these facts make more sense then  of the stuff being being discussed anywhere else. Thought you might like a different slant on the discussion.



After every mass shooting, the gun debate splits into two camps: One side says it easily could have been avoided if these maniacs weren't allowed to have guns; the other says it easily could have been avoided if each innocent victim had only gone through their daily lives in cover formation, armed like the space marines entering the giant murder womb in Aliens.

And that's pretty much the entire gun control debate, as far as the mainstream media are willing to cover. And that is a shame, because it leaves out all of the most interesting parts. Trust us, the longer you look into this, the weirder it gets. For instance ...

#5. Gun Owners Are Mostly Responsible, But Gun Companies' Ad Campaigns Are Fucking Insane


The world is no doubt full of level-headed gun owners who are all about safety and responsible ownership (Note: one of the authors of this article owns four guns, one of which he keeps up his sleeve in a spring-loaded apparatus). They scoff at ridiculous macho action movie fantasies, and they have never stuck a gun through the open fly of their pants and said, "Hey look, it's my gun dick." But gun manufacturers do not themselves appear to share their view.

Photos.com/Hemera Technologies/PhotoObjects.net
"We at Ruger find the gun dick extremely refreshing on hot summer days."

For instance, do you insecure males want to get your "man card" back? Then you need to buy a Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifle, according to renowned masculinity experts Bushmaster (as their ad campaign puts it, "In a world of rapidly depleting testosterone, the Bushmaster Man Ca...").

"I haven't seen my penis in years, so this is comforting."

Wait, is that the same assault rifle the Newtown shooter used? It totally is! That's why they had to pull their "man card" campaign. In the aftermath of the shooting, these ads were forwarded around by disbelieving gun control advocates who seemed shocked to find that they existed, as if gun ads had been outlawed back when cigarettes stopped showing up in Sports Illustrated. It turns out that this is a pretty big blind spot in the gun control debate -- one whole side is made up of people who don't encounter gun ads in their natural habitat and therefore miss a big part of the picture. And that picture looks like this:

Advanced Armament Corp
Gunfitti is a major problem in many American cities.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_20396_5-mind-blowing-facts-nobody-to...

Views: 113

Replies to This Discussion

well here's where the 2nd ammendment gets a bit murky blithe .. the founding fathers knowing full well how governments and kingdoms can get outta hand really fast wanted to insure that the people always had a right to arms in case of an oppressive government.. so just what is an oppressive government ?? ahh.. there's the rub .. it could be them simply tellin you that you have to fight a war you object to perhaps to some ?? to downright marchin one race off to internment camps ?? and we did both .. but far as i know after the war the internment camps were closed and they went back to where they came from .. or some of them did anyway .. but i'm sure it wasn't the same .. but what if we had taken it a step further and like hitler we decided to gas all the japs durin the war cause after all the only good jap back then was a dead jap ??we even had a civil war because half the country thought it was ok to own and do whatever they wanted to a slave and the other half disagreed .. that was a point where they could have used the second ammendment .. i'm not sayin the south was right .. but they thought so .. when george washington called for a tax on whiskey it pissed off a lotta people and sparked revolts .. but in the end the 2nd ammendment still stood .. some thought that tax was oppressive .. so thats where that 2nd ammendment gets murky .. and when they passed that they said a WELL REGULATED MILITIA .. exactly what does that mean ?? does it mean they are simply regulated by the states they're in by some kind of state army commander ?? or did it mean that they should be armed amply to do whatever job a militia had to do ?? cause if it meant that no matter what kind of weapons we get the army still is armed better .. back then it was a musket and ball and maybe a few cannons .. now we have tanks and choppers with 50 caliber guns on them .. jets with guided missles .. drones that can take you out from 8000 miles away.. and if things get really sticky they can still nuke ya .. gee misissippi is actin up ?? guess we'll just have to nuke the bastards .. of course all this is just me goin to the extreme but how many times lookin back thru history did we as humans take things to the extreme.. as smart as we are you'd think we'd learn by now to all just get along wouldn't ya ??         

I agree blithe. The second amendment if completely and correctly clearly provides for the regulation of all arms.

I dough we will ever see less Government , it will just keep growing till our end . Sad they can't agree on anything ...




© 2022   Created by Aggie.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service