Fuck you Charleton Heston
Fuck you buddy. Moses was definately not packing heat when the exodus thing went down. Although I have to say it was sort of amusing that the president of the NRA had alzheimers when he was still the fucking president. Those assholes think EVERYONE should be allowed to own a gun. You went from a pseudoreligious icon to a lowlife. Thanks to you there is wonderful news to report. The same online gun dealer sold to the school shooter in both the Virginia tech shooting, and the NIU shooting. When asked if he felt guilty that he sold to school shooters, the man actually encouraged other college students to buy from him. Thats right, if everyone bought guns from this fuckhead, we could have shootouts in the classroom instead of massacres. great logic. Maybe you could just not be a douchebag. that would work to. We have the second highest number of guns per capita in the world, and by far the highest gun murder rates. Every year, almost 20, 000 people are killed with guns in this country. Compare that with the 3, 000 people that were killed in 9/11, which was supposedly a big deal. Every year we have 7 9/11's due to guns. Fuck you Heston. Enjoy your eternity in hell
Rating:4.65
Comments
-
31so the two year old in my town that just shot himself accidently was a "violent person"
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
32I'm really loving how Heston is being pretty much directly blamed for gun deaths.
Guns don't kill people, you fucking moron: PEOPLE DO. If it weren't for guns, it'd be something else potentially dangerous such as knives, popsicle sticks, straws, hairspray, hockey pucks, or what have you.
Before you defile someone's legacy for happening to support a cause, why don't you just take a second and realize that blaming him for you ranting bullshit is simply ignorant at best.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
33Guns don't kill people, you fucking moron: PEOPLE DO
Yeah, and nuclear blasts dont level cities, people do. Of course, people werent able to do it with the same efficiency and ease as before nuclear weapons existed, but that is immaterial. We should proliferate WMDs because if everyone had a suitcase nuke, no one could steal my tv.
Kinda bullshit logic, dont you think
Man oh man do i fucking hate you rednecks
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
34I am not anti gun, but lets face it, guns make it alot easier for people to be violent.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
35WTF do nuclear weapons have to do with anything? Yes, man created them and it's probably one of the three things we wish we could dis-invent. Despite the fact that nuclear weapons level cities, it still is on the people behind the scenes giving the go ahead. Until you can see that guns, nukes, or what have you are just tools in the process, you're going to look like an idiot.. oh, wait. You've already done that.
Oh yeah.. where do you come off stating that because I or others happen to enjoy guns makes us a redneck? If it weren't for tree hugging, hippie fucks like you, we'd have been invaded by Mexico, Germany, or Russia by now and you wouldn't have room to bitch about anything.
Fuck you and your "bullshit logic". It makes perfect sense but you're clearly too liberalized to see that.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
36bullshit logic my educated ass. the army stops foreign invaders, not sister fucking douchebags like you. Just cause you can walk into a store and say "gimme a gun" through your two teeth doesnt mean you should get one. I made the same argument for nuclear weapons to show how rediculous it is. If you are using clear logic, it would apply to both cases. Now shut your mouth before I circumcise you by kicking your sister in the chin.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
37Educated? Hardly. Go back to your hairy legged peacenik and donkey punch her. Maybe that'll make you feel better.
In your world, there would be no weapons. How the fuck is the U. S. Army or any other military force going to do so without arms? Foul language? Gimme a fucking break.
As far as owning a firearm, I'm obliged to do so by the second ammendment; however, do I think that it should address all? Absolutely not. I'm a responsible firearms owner and a military veteran. I think I know how to hadle weapons correctly and safely. That is NOT the case for everyone.
And I don't have a sister, but I'm sure your mother would love my knob. Fuck off, liberal. You're just another idiot in a long and undistinguished line. Keep talking shit and I'll pistol whip the teeth out of your mouth.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
38Fuck you, the right to bear arms asshole.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
39#37 Please define my views for me you redneck unclefucker. In my world there would be no weapons........... yeah, except for I did not say that, in fact, it should be obvious to the ignorant that I implicitly argued the opposite. Therein lies the problem. You are obviously an ignorant moonshine swilling nascar watching daughter raping bastard. Armies should have guns to repel foreign invasion, as I already said.
As for the second ammendment, perhaps you should read it again. You are not obliged to own guns by the 2nd Amend, you are allowed to, big difference. However, the 2nd amend also says something about standing militias. Which standing militia are you a part of? Seems kinda antiquated to me.........
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
40The nuclear weapon anaolgy is just plain moronic. Guns were invented for several reasons, one of them being self defense, but they were also invented for hunting and killing food. On the other hand, nuclear weapons were invented for one reason and one reason only and I've never heard of anyone using a nuclear weapon to kill some animals to feed someone's family.
You idiots that are acting like it's only rednecks that have guns are morons. I assure you that a very very small minority of crimes that are committed with guns are committed by rednecks. If you actually had a brain you'd realize that the majority of crimes are committed in urban areas and the percentages are much higher in large cities. How many "rednecks" do you see running around in New York, Chicago or LA? Fucking idiot.
Analyze why crimes are committed in the first place.
To kill someone out of anger is one and if that person didn't have a gun, they'd find something else to use, even if it was their bare hands.
Guns are also used to commit robberies. Do you think that someone couldn't figure out a way to rob a bank if they didn't have a gun?
The problem with you gun control fanatics is you don't think anything through before you talk.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
411. the guy that responds to everything I say by calling me a liberal is a redneck. That is the redneck logic. Anything that is not a republican talking point is obviously advanced by a liberal. (I am not a democrat)
2. While it is true that the majority of gun crimes are committed in cities, that is a twisted stat. Remember, statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is intriguing, but what they conceal is vital. On a per capita basis, New York city is actually one of the safest places in america. They accomplished this by cracking down on guns. They get a bad name because of the '70s, but look at todays stats, per capita, most rural areas have higher crime rates. the same can be said for most major urban areas. Of course an area with millions of people will have more crime than an area with thousands, but on a per capita basis, cities are safer.
3. If there was no such thing as guns (which I am not advocating), bank robberies would drop precipitously. People rob banks with guns or by sticking their hand in their pocket and pretending to have a gun. If you think clubs, angry words, etc would be as effective for robberies, you are incredibly illogical.
4. If someone tries to kill me out of anger with their bare hands, I could kick them in the jimmy and run like hell. It doesnt work as well when they have a gun. The "find something else" idea is quite weak. Even with a knife, once the victim puts some distance between himself and the assailant, he is safe, not so with a gun.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
42Yeah.. I cvan see just how poorly educated you really are, liberal. Do I care what political affiliation you may or may not have? No. Does it make me giggle a bit to know that I've touched a nerve by stating your a tree huggin, hairy bush loving, liberal anti-gun puke? Absolutely.
Though you may NOT have implicitly stated a world without weapons, you may as well have done so. Your first response to me made the absolutely asinine conparison between firearms and nuclear weapons. Yeah, that's a solid comparison.. Additionally, you never once stated (as far as our diatribe is concerned) that only military personnel should have firearms.
As far as the second ammendment is concerned, I'm very well aware of what it explicitly states, the right afforded to assholes like you and responsible gun owners like myself, and what it means to take an oath to protect the remaining articles of the bill of rights so fuckwads like you can run your mouth. Can the same be said for you? I doubt it.
In retort to a few of your other comments, people rob banks without having to say a word. All they need is a note and the teller is trained to do what it says and give up the money, the mere threat being real or perceived. Maybe you haven't had the unfortunate luxury of being on the bank side of a teller line when something like that happens as I have. You do what your told and that's that. Guns or otherwise.
Lastly, as far as "kicking someone in the jimmy" and running away, good luck with that. If someone REALLY wants to kill you with their bare hands, that shit isn't going to work. All it would do is piss me the fuck off to kill you faster and, as a matter of spite, I'd certainly make it my mission for making my nuts sore.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
431. You claimed without firearms, other nations would invade. I said the military would prevent that. That is an implicitly arguing for an armed body (the military) Sorry if you were too busy crying over earnhardt hitting the wall to catch that
2. your third paragraph doesnt make a whole hell of a lot of sense. Can what be said of me? I dont know- you cannot write effectively.
3. Notes work because often people have guns. If there was no chance that the person had a gun, the teller would giggle at a note the same way I giggle at panhandlers
4. JIMMY KICKS ARE FAR MORE EFFECTIVE WHEN THERE ARE NO GUNS INVOLVED Maybe not 100%, but not oh, I dont know, lets say like 0% when the other guy has a gun.
5 If a line of logic carries for an argument, it can be applied to other arguments. If logic cannot fit different circumstances, then it is faulty logic. Get it? hence the abomb reference. (Kinda like the whole "we cant have abortion because we beleive in the sanctity of human life, but we are all for capital punishment" logic) sanctity of life logic? not so much. Guns are great logic? not so much
I feel sad that you will never know whether your blindness was caused by frequent masturbation to pictures of richard nixon or catching a bad batch of homebrew
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
44You're such a douche it's tragic.
I said that if WE didn't have firearms and other did, they'd invade. Perhaps YOU are the one crying over the dead batteries in your vibrator and not paying attention.
My third paragraph makes perfect sense. As in, do you know what the Bill of Rights, specifically the second ammendmant means, and actually serving your country to protect those rights? I doubt it, and that's why I stated it so. Go back to school if your comprehension is so subpar.
Not all logic can be applied to other arguments as they are not succintly relevant and trying to make them so would be a strecth at best and would invalidate any form of logic being attempted. The A-bomb reference and guns have little in common other than they were both created by man and are tools for destructive purposes. Does it still take someone to grab that weapon or push that button? Yes. Does it make it the fault of the device for working as it was designed? No. It's still on the person, and that's the end of it.
I love how you continually use references to rednecks, Nascar, and what have you when I don't fit into any of those ignorant stereotypes. Should that shoe fit you however, wear it proudly. It suits you.
Posted 4 months ago | Report -
45And what does any of this have to do with Heston, the person? Heston didn't sell the weapons and isn't responsible in any way for the shootings at NIU or VT or anywhere else. You reference an online gun dealer and his desire to sell more guns. How does that directly relate to Heston? He was the president of the NRA and that's all and certainly didn't advocate guns being used in either of those instances.
Posted 4 months ago | Report