Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/17/04 09:49 PM, Jlop985 wrote: ... people are evil

Whoops, just did it again. No, I'm truly sorry, I was just pulling out quick bits of info, didn't read it over. Hopefully most people caught that you didn't say all people are evil. And the ones who didn't catch that? They don't really matter. Sad but true....

Skunk, stop irritating newbies...

At 2/18/04 05:53 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: Skunk, irritat.. newbies...

That one didn't work quite as well... You can't add letters, you can only drop them... hmm.

At 2/18/04 12:17 PM, -redskunk- wrote: You can't add... you can...

Make up your mind :P

At 2/8/04 02:32 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: Purely out of interest, in the past year, how many times have the following things occurred?

(you can look what he said for yourself)

This is where i must divert from your thinking bumcheekcity. It is very rare i divert from traditional liberal thought, but that may be because i think they are all in it together, bastards. Anyway guns are needed just as much as hoplite armor was needed in ancient greece to preserve their freedom, all the men from city-states would fight to the death for independence. And if i'm under rule of a government that suddenly stripes its people of liberty then thats an attack on my country from an outsider (illegitimate government) then i would fight with guns. Its very simple a government cant oppress an armed populace, they must deceive them.

At 2/18/04 11:10 PM, miket311 wrote: Anyway guns are needed just as much as hoplite armor was needed in ancient greece to preserve their freedom, all the men from city-states would fight to the death for independence.

The Ancient Greeks didn't feel the need to defend their freedom from their government. They didnt' wear their armour all the time anyway. And either way, armour is meant to DEFEND. It's hard to attack with it. A gun is for attacking and killing. That's its function. If yo're truly worriesd about being shot, get some body armour.

And if i'm under rule of a government that suddenly stripes its people of liberty then thats an attack on my country from an outsider (illegitimate government) then i would fight with guns.

What is it with you guys? You're government can't really oppress you any more than it is now, and you [as a country] seem to love having your rights taken away from you! Look at the fucking Patriot Act for god's sake. You can be arrested without trial, and detained indefinately. If that's not livng under a Dictatorship then, short of actually declaring yourself a Dictatorship, I dont know how you can get any closer.

Its very simple a government cant oppress an armed populace, they must deceive them.

And it's suceeding so well...

The right to bear arms is archaic, something written at a time when arms consisted of muskets that took minutes to fire a single shot, and armed citizentry was a necessity due to the fact that the United States didn't have an army at the time.

If they were aware that 300 years later, the word "arms" could potentially mean things like rocket launchers, flamethrowers, assault rifles, and nuclear missiles, the framers of the Constitution may have given some thought to making the Second Amendment so broadly worded. Guns kill people. Yes, people kill people, but guns help them kill more people.

The "Gol durn it, we need guns so we can go huntin' " NRA crowd doesn't seem to realize that they are creating a market for high-powered, extremely accurate, and lethal weapons that can easily end up the hands of people who's targets don't have antlers. And whoever's been saying that if someone is armed, then they can't fall victim to an oppressive government, well, just look at 70TA.

At 2/19/04 06:13 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:

The Ancient Greeks didn't feel the need to defend their freedom from their government. They didnt' wear their armour all the time anyway. And either way, armour is meant to DEFEND. It's hard to attack with it. A gun is for attacking and killing. That's its function. If yo're truly worriesd about being shot, get some body armour.

You seem to miss the point the armor was to signify an armed populace. THEY HAD SPEARS TOO. Im not worried about getting shot.

What is it with you guys? You're government can't really oppress you any more than it is now, and you [as a country] seem to love having your rights taken away from you! Look at the fucking Patriot Act for god's sake. You can be arrested without trial, and detained indefinately. If that's not livng under a Dictatorship then, short of actually declaring yourself a Dictatorship, I dont know how you can get any closer.

Well i know you read what i said but i will give you the benefit of the doubt and clarify. As it stands they cant up and stripe our rights as a whole they must deceive (eg. invent urgent need for patriot act and striping rights). Actually now is inopportune for defending rights as it were. I know they are waiting for a big push to finish fucking our rights. The idea of an armed populace is they have to fight vs a government in unison we wont have that due to deception.

Its very simple a government cant oppress an armed populace, they must deceive them.

And it's suceeding so well...

i know

Some interesting facts

Hitler had the best gun control policies in history, followed by stalin. Dictatorships solidify rule by taking away guns, we shouldnt need guns but if we lose them at this point i think ill just move to a fucking island cause were screwed and i cant help.

At 2/20/04 12:38 AM, OpIvy420 wrote:

then they can't fall victim to an oppressive government, well, just look at 70TA.

its called rule by deception next time keep reading.
Anyway fuck people that kill people because they are idiots, its their damned fault they would try w/o guns with knives or something. Why must idiots ruin so so so much, idiots are the reason governments exist..................DAMN YOU DARWIN WHY HASNT IT WORKED YET they are still here, all of them hell even more its insane.

"I wish i was immortal so i could see the fall of man and laugh my ass off" - Me

At 2/20/04 12:55 AM, miket311 wrote: Well i know you read what i said but i will give you the benefit of the doubt and clarify. As it stands they cant up and stripe our rights as a whole they must deceive (eg. invent urgent need for patriot act and striping rights). Actually now is inopportune for defending rights as it were. I know they are waiting for a big push to finish fucking our rights. The idea of an armed populace is they have to fight vs a government in unison we wont have that due to deception.

The funny think I think about the "revolution" argument is that the majority of the people that support it vote for the republicans, who remove their rights, which is exactly the thing they say they're trying to defend.

Hitler had the best gun control policies in history, followed by stalin. Dictatorships solidify rule by taking away guns, we shouldnt need guns but if we lose them at this point i think ill just move to a fucking island cause were screwed and i cant help.

You'll NEVER use your gun to fight the Government. Bush is not [yet] Hitler. America LIKES acts like Patriot Act. If you as a country support it, you as a person must fight it by getting out there with some people who agree with you and doing something about it. Dont take guns. People remember, and think about men without guns.

well to tell you the truth, people kill people, with their bare hands knives,bats, chains, anything should we ban knives?

At 2/20/04 07:25 AM, shotheman wrote: well to tell you the truth, people kill people, with their bare hands knives,bats, chains, anything should we ban knives?

Not for kitchen use. But carrying them in public and stuff, definately.

well some people walk around guns, and a majority of people keep their guns inside so i guess keeping them inside is good

At 2/20/04 07:00 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:

The funny think I think about the "revolution" argument is that the majority of the people that support it vote for the republicans, who remove their rights, which is exactly the thing they say they're trying to defend.

i wish it was far more funny then it actually is

You'll NEVER use your gun to fight the Government.

i dont even own a gun but i wont take the guns away from other people.

At 2/20/04 07:25 AM, shotheman wrote: well to tell you the truth, people kill people, with their bare hands knives,bats, chains, anything should we ban knives?

uhuhuhuhuh. if the columbine kids had knives.... how many people do you think would be dead.

to loosely quote mike moore, according to the constitution we have the right to bare arms. should we have the right to bare weapons grade plutoniam? what about dynamite? how about anthrax? unless you think we should all have a daisy cutter in the backyard you must think that there should be limits to this constitutional right. then you realise the consitution can be read in any light, to favour any current political view. you are simply saying "our take on the consitituion is better than yours" which is wrong.

thank god i don't live in america

At 2/21/04 09:41 PM, the_unknown_soldier wrote:

stuff about the 2nd ammendment

id like to have a nuke id be my back yard man id be my own nuclear power and then id probably be in the UN then i would say
"no you are out of order this whole god damned system is out of order"

At 2/21/04 09:41 PM, the_unknown_soldier wrote: uhuhuhuhuh. if the columbine kids had knives.... how many people do you think would be dead.

Man, they could have done all sorts of damage, adding a close range attack to their long range one would have increased their lethality tenfold. After all, any video game fan knows that Hand to Hand is one of the best ways to take out crowds when you're low on ammo. It's a good thing they only had guns.

At 2/21/04 11:11 PM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote:

At 2/21/04 09:41 PM, the_unknown_soldier wrote: uhuhuhuhuh. if the columbine kids had knives.... how many people do you think would be dead.

Man, they could have done all sorts of damage, adding a close range attack to their long range one would have increased their lethality tenfold. After all, any video game fan knows that Hand to Hand is one of the best ways to take out crowds when you're low on ammo. It's a good thing they only had guns.

i love the "only" i meant if they had knives instead of guns. can you imagine, a bunch of buff football players going "yea ok ill let this wekling goth stab me? no! they'd get the shit beaten out of them. anyway, columbine wasn't caused by guns, it just wasn't helped by it

Weren't they also using explosives or something. I seem to remember something about how most of their bombs failed to explode. Should chemicals be illegal too?

At 2/21/04 09:41 PM, the_unknown_soldier wrote: to loosely quote mike moore

No, I'd rather you didn't. Half of the forum summarily stopped reading your post when the words 'michael moore' came up.

At 2/22/04 02:08 AM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: Weren't they also using explosives or something. I seem to remember something about how most of their bombs failed to explode. Should chemicals be illegal too?

why not i mean to quote thomas hobbes "the lives of men are nasty brutish and short" the govt should have all the power i mean damn hobbes was a genious and so are hippies. (dirty hippies)

as my friend put it last night when we were drinking a hippy party "i think i hate hippies worse then republicans because republicans are so wrong its funny"

At 2/22/04 11:50 PM, miket311 wrote: as my friend put it last night when we were drinking a hippy party "i think i hate hippies worse then republicans because republicans are so wrong its funny"

Oh, oh, today during conversation, vegetarianism was brought up, and me and a friend are vegans, albiet ones that eat honey (thus, not strict vegans). So we said that only hippies don't eat honey.. Yeah, had to be there..

At 2/22/04 11:59 PM, -redskunk- wrote:

Oh, oh, today during conversation, vegetarianism was brought up, and me and a friend are vegans, albiet ones that eat honey (thus, not strict vegans). So we said that only hippies don't eat honey.. Yeah, had to be there..

that wasnt subtle enough

At 2/22/04 02:08 AM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: Weren't they also using explosives or something. I seem to remember something about how most of their bombs failed to explode. Should chemicals be illegal too?

If they're packed into a hand grenade, yes.

At 2/22/04 11:59 PM, -redskunk- wrote: Oh, oh, today during conversation, vegetarianism was brought up, and me and a friend are vegans, albiet ones that eat honey

Than you're not vegan, period, my Skunked friend. That's like my cousin, who claims she's vegeterian, but eats chicken.

I have four words for you all.

WHO THE FUCK CARES

At 2/23/04 08:13 AM, whatty wrote: I have four words for you all.

WHO THE FUCK CARES

If you dont care, dont post here, by all means, but dont tell us you dont care, because we dont care.

At 2/22/04 10:21 PM, -redskunk- wrote:

At 2/21/04 09:41 PM, the_unknown_soldier wrote: to loosely quote mike moore

No, I'd rather you didn't. Half of the forum summarily stopped reading your post when the words 'michael moore' came up.

lmao

Yeah, you really lose the thought when you bring in ANY radical. I was trying to post something in here, but at this point, the topic is... shot

At 2/23/04 04:40 AM, True-Lies wrote: Than you're not vegan, period, my Skunked friend. That's like my cousin, who claims she's vegeterian, but eats chicken.

Meh, I really don't care about the terminology. If you want to say I'm not vegan because I eat honey, go ahead.

At 2/23/04 01:13 PM, Gooie wrote: Yeah, you really lose the thought when you bring in ANY radical. I was trying to post something in here, but at this point, the topic is... shot

Moore isn't really a radical though. He's just left.