Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Colion Noir" channel.

  1. This was announced in 2015-2016 for MIL sales. The logic being that you'd get a compromise 5.56 weapon that would not require keeping both long 5.56 and short 9mm weapons on hand, just 5.56 all around.
    29
  2. Ramled Mas no, there were zero exceptions. Did you misunderstand my point? If you shout fire in a crowded theater, the consequences determine your punishment. However, nobody stapled your lips shut. You had free speech, nobody took your rights away. If you kill someone in the name of religion, religion isn't banned. You go to jail. You. You can search anything about the Mayans and follow their religion. You're absolutely free, nothing can stop you. You can also kill someone - but you shouldn't. You can do anything you want, we can't stop you because this isn't Minority Report. You just can't claim that you did it because of your freedoms, because they won't be there for you in court.
    9
  3. The rioters should have stayed home too.
    6
  4. Nick Cramer  "Little do you know is that most of this violence revolves around the dealing of drugs and the person with the small amount of drugs in their pocket is supporting these people that commit gun violence." If the drugs weren't illegal, the criminals wouldn't be dealing them in the first place. Remember Prohibition? Legalizing alcohol did the opposite of supporting bootleggers and gangsters.
    5
  5. The Lone Voice I know someone already said it, but he used a shotgun. Look, by your logic all a shooter needs is taking two guns to shoot anyone charging him during a reload. Or tape two magazines together. Or weld two magazines into a bigger one. It's a freaking box, a baseplate, follower and a spring. Anyone can modify them.
    4
  6. The Lone Voice Admit that it would make it more difficult? Why? If we're pitting those sickos against unarmed people, they always "win". We'll throw a celebration in the form of 24/7 media coverage and worship his image by quoting his statements, showing off his manifestos, backtracking archived footage to show that time his right hand appeared on film during a table tennis competition. Imagining that I would enter a place to shoot it up, it wouldn't make a difference which kind of weapon you gave me if the people in there were unarmed. If you gave me a musket, I'd probably use some paper and white glue to attempt to make pre-loaded shells to allow me to fire faster, fill them with buckshot to hit more people. Check out Tacome1942 on youtube, he made fake shells for his paper shotgun, with the proper diameter those could be easily shoved down a musket barrel preloaded with projectiles and propellant. These guys don't "snap", they usually have a plan. How is taping two magazines together "little more difficult"? Everyone has duct tape. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=332164 Look, a guy made a longer magazine for his bolt action rifle. Think people can't cut the bottom off a mag and weld some plates to extend it? Or maybe a spare mag, if looks are a concern.
    4
  7. The Green Man Actually, turning a blind eye solves the issue. If you stop caring about drug dealers, their profession becomes less demanding and less risky. They will need to either increase the quality of the drugs or reduce prices, both options will make drug dealing so unprofitable there's no point in shooting anyone over the drugs. Remember how crime peaked after the Prohibition? If we focus on drugs as a health issue instead of a criminal issue we'll have less addicts, less people out there with a felony record who can't get a job and resort to crime, etc.
    4
  8. Basically the NRA supported the bump stock ban and red-flag laws. Now, it doesn't matter what you think about bump stocks - if a government decides you can't own a piece of plastic, can you really trust them to let you own guns? Regarding the red flag laws, they sound reasonable in principle but basically anyone can lie and call the authorities to ask for your guns to be removed. It's very easy to make false statements and those who make them won't always get punished because prosecution fears that punishing the false accusers will make real accusers afraid to come forward. So if if you have a quarrel with a neighbor or problems with an ex you might have a false accusation forcing you to spend time in court proving your innocence. Not to mention that sometimes bad things happen. When the police shows up to take the guns it's not always peaceful. Trigger-happy cops sometimes get addresses wrong, or make a house raid without knocking and end up shooting the homeowner who thought he was being robbed, or they restrain a family but the dog starts barking so they shoot the dog... Sorry for rambling, but these new laws are seriously pissing off gun owners. The NRA basically allowed this to happen because these laws won't reduce gun sales like a ban would, and they probably hoped that by letting these laws pass they're better able to fight off new laws. Well, multiple states are trying to crack down on guns and the NRA is nowhere to be seen. Even at the federal level they are trying to introduce gun control. The NRA on social media seems more focused on talking about their new cooler partnership since the Yeti brand of coolers dropped the NRA.
    4
  9. GOA helped bring constitutional carry to North Dakota. They helped in Manuel v. Joliet. They helped defeat a gun registry in New Mexico. They helped kill Paul Ryan's healthcare bill that included backdoor gun control.
    4
  10. Mark Massingill All the evidence from countries which decriminalized drugs points to positive outcomes. I don't want to get high. I don't even drink alcohol. The pure, cold hard fact is that once your gang can't sell drugs it stops being profitable. Stealing isn't that profitable, and there's pretty much no territory to maintain because you don't have to sit around distributing product. You steal, get out.
    3
  11. cronicjointpain except that the people who reach Hollywood fame can pick and choose the parts they audition for. I don't think Liam Neeson would starve if he stopped doing the Taken movies. I get where you're coming from, but their preemptive excuses are rubbish. Richard Armitage doesn't like guns but in the same interview claimed he didn't want to make scenes or photoshoots for Strike Back that glorify guns. Hello? The show depicts his character having a handgun at home despite living in England and working as a mere parking lot security guard. But the kicker is that Chris Ryan himself, a freaking ex-SAS, trash talked "American gun culture" and how the new Strike Back seasons are just guns and sex. His books are guns and sex. I got three of them and only one doesn't have sex in it - in the other two the main character fucks two women. In an interview he said he offered to escort the neighbors into a restaurant but they refused as they were packing. He goes "hurr what kind of danger you think you'll be that justifies carrying a gun?". I don't know, Ryan, what kind of danger justifies being escorted by former SAS?
    3
  12. The Lone Voice Monash University, 2002. Also, New Zealand also stopped having mass shootings at the same time and they didn't use Australia's gun control model.
    3
  13. That's what everyone says after they fuck up. I was 12 years old at one point and also used that excuse. We could all grow up a little and admit that when a joke is politically motivated, it's still politically charged - and comedy doesn't make it less reprehensible when the message is wrong in many fundamental levels.
    3
  14.  @copiouscat  A pun is when you use double meanings or similarly sounding words. Like when Arnie says "you're fired" when he fires a missile the terrorist is stuck to in True Lies. Or saying "I did Nazi that coming" when talking about something in WW2 because it sounds like "not see". The Noir jokes fall under analogies, using comparisons.
    3
  15. Also, there's Gun Owners of America, Firearms Policy Coalition and Second Amendment Foundation if you're looking to sponsor other organizations.
    3
  16. Nowhere in the constitution does it say you can't suffer the consequences of your actions. If you slander, you get sued, even with free speech. If you kill, you go to jail, even if it's your religion.
    2
  17. collin ohlinger Except there's thousands of SWAT calls for no-knock warrants for stuff like credit card fraud, etc. I agree that it's cheaper to get surplus from the military, but a lot of stuff isn't surplus. Plus, violent crime has been on the decline for the past two decades and a lot of these SWAT teams have been popping out in small cities with little crime. If an officer needs it, he/she buys it from his own pocket like all the other civilians. "Fighting the cartels", as if nobody was willing to take that cartel money to divert police attention away from them. Those items will be used on American citizens, many times on non-drug dealing ones.
    2
  18. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia#Research It wasn't that effective.
    2
  19. Mark Massingill >"There is no reason the average person cannot do without marijuana" But there's also no reason why it should be illegal and that's the core of the argument. Not that people "need" weed. There's also no reason the average person cannot do without a gun. By the same logic we could ban guns by determining how much someone "needs" it. "You haven't been murdered? Then you don't really need a gun yet, do you? Come back after you can prove you were in danger." >"I'm not for simply ignoring laws we don't agree with when there are perfectly legal avenues to work for change.  I don't pity anyone who chose to break the law and is now paying the consequences of that act.  Showing such disregard for the law is a bad trend to set." Lex iniusta non est lex “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” ― Martin Luther King Jr. “Protest beyond the law is not a departure from democracy; it is absolutely essential to it.” ― Howard Zinn “An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law” ― Martin Luther King Jr. “If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law” ― Henry David Thoreau “An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so. Now the law of nonviolence says that violence should be resisted not by counter-violence but by nonviolence. This I do by breaking the law and by peacefully submitting to arrest and imprisonment.” ― Mahatma Gandhi, Non-violence in Peace and War 1942-49 “When EVIL men make bad laws, righteous men disobey them." Pastor Butch Paugh” ― Tarrin P. Lupo
    2
  20. Mark Massingill "Actually, when it comes to guns it is illegal in every state that I know of to carry while intoxicated and even when just drinking any amount of alcohol in some" Pretty sure it's also a crime to drive impaired by drugs or to stab people, sober, drunk or on PCP. You have defeated your own argument. >"I guess you ignored that part of my statement." When you criticize the legalization of victim-less behaviour by mentioning other acts that involve criminal actions (which also exist with recourse to other legal drugs), you're ignoring your own belief that people have rights to their body. A right to one's body doesn't grant him the rights to drive impaired or stab people. >"Simply ignoring laws you don't like is wrong" The Nazis criminalized people who helped Jews escape. Is ignoring that law wrong? We must have Immanuel Kant all up in here.
    2
  21. Mark Massingill 1. All those harms exist with prohibition. 2. All the harms you mentioned would be illegal anyway. 3. Actual real world evidence points to the fact that many countries used legalization to curb drug abuse, leading to less crime/driving under the influence of drugs. So yes, it's a positive outcome to legalize. >"As for mind altering substances that we don't understand and which are not necessary for life illegal is not immoral." Yes, it is immoral, no, drugs are not misunderstood. We test them all on animals and humans all the time. I know self-taught people who learned chemistry just to experiement new drugs on themselves. >"Any law that could lead to direct harm I'd agree was immoral and needed to be fought.  Since it is completely possible to live without these substances, obeying the law while working to change opinion and change said laws is the best course of action, especially when ignoring them opens up and supports illegal markets, gang culture, very harmful cartel activity and so forth" I don't see how it's a person's fault the government forces him/her to buy from shady dealers. Plus, you're conveniently ignoring personal growing/"cooking" of drugs. Making a "victimless crime" illegal, even if not needed, is immoral because it initiates aggression against non-violent people. >"old laws keeping African Americans in the back of the bus were.  There is a difference." There isn't. THEY INITIATED AGGRESSION AGAINST PEOPLE WHO DID NOT HARM ANYONE. THERE IS NO NEED TO SIT IN A SPECIFIC PART OF THE BUS - IT WAS STILL IMMORAL TO CRIMINALIZE A VICTIMLESS ACTION.
    2
  22. Tim Barton Wasn't the Chinese attacker going for ears and faces, though? Same thing with the stabbing in a Texas university, the attacker seemed to go for noses and stuff. Not jugulars, or anywhere in which a laceration will make you bleed out before the ambulance is dispatched. The US is not a high income country. It looks a lot more like Mexico or Brazil in terms of poverty than Finland or Switzerland. In terms of the last century, it's history is closer to South Africa's than France or Spain. The US is also fighting a War on Drugs. Street prices of many drugs in the US seem to be in average higher than in Europe because of prohibition. Remember when Prohibition 1.0 failed and created a profit in organized crime? Prohibition 2.0's effects are still being felt. It has the highest incarceration rate - there's people out there who won't ever get a decent job and won't be able to leave the life of crime. Modern US is also not comparable to the "Wild West". Sorry, but the US is a complete outlier in terms of "developed" countries. Even people in high-tax bureaucratic socialist-influenced states such as Sweden are rated to have more economic freedom than the people from the US.
    2
  23. charlie brown many times movies put an emphasis of the whistling and ricochet of bullets. Also, silenced guns. Pew pew is a joke on those sound effects.
    2
  24. No, he's not. You're thinking of Viktor Bout. He's the inspiration for the movie "lord of war" but he's not a warlord, he just stole Russian guns from armories and flew them to Africa on a cargo plane.
    2
  25. He didn't act like a hero, he is one.
    2
  26. I understand the argument but we've already been sitting cars for decades.
    2
  27. We're on 2.93" tall optic mounts at this point because NODs are the cool thing now.
    2
  28. Bullpups have been around for a while. It was never a NFA problem from what I can remember, it's the braces or the folder adapters combined with the "firearm" classification that blur the lines.
    2
  29. That doesn't make any sense. Watch videos of criminals dealing with unarmed British police, they're absolutely empowered and you can see multiple cops tripping over themselves trying to play catch with a grown man. A gun doesn't encourage crime, most property crime is opportunistic and deals with how potential victims would react so it's the surrounding environment that encourages the crime. Criminals rob cars without access to guns all over the world. And you only have to look at countries like Mexico, Brazil, Honduras, El Salvador, etc to realize how lack of legal access to guns still doesn't change the fact that criminals have guns. After the UK banned handguns, gun crime actually rose.
    2
  30.  @mikemartin5749  "You do not have the ability to comprehend that a person can be against vigilantism" - This wasn't vigilantism, dude shot people attacking him. "and also be against rioters and property damage. I am against property damage." - I mean, you're not when you're out here insisting that we shouldn't interfere with property destruction. "I sympathize with those that lost assets in the riot" - Sympathy doesn't solve the problem. "but our laws do not allow you to kill that person unless your life is in danger." - Kyle was in danger. Also, funny that we're pretending that the law actually matters. The felon who was carrying the Glock, has he been arrested for illegal possession and concealed carry? We're not living under laws, we're living under anarcho-tyranny. Everyone does whatever the fuck they want and the government is nowhere to be seen, but when the government has a gripe with you the hammer comes down. "but he fucking asked for it" - Tell it to a rape victim. "Damage and graffiti can be dealt with once the crowds are dispersed, which they always eventually are." - Just let them have their fill. Whoa. Big brained solution my dude. Just let them do everything they want until they get tired, fuck whoever loses their shit. "First he's a medic, then he has a "job" protecting property." - What? I'm not aware of any "job" but all that matters was him being attacked. "All a bullshit facade to go to the middle of a riot and try to play hero. " - What about the bullshit facade of pretending to be angry at the government and police to then only show up to steal and burn other people's shit?
    2
  31.  @steverodriguez2582  Can't ban something that can be built off parts.
    2
  32. He was bound to be released anyway.
    2
  33. There's a lot of people he could have picked that up from. The shooting competitors have used this grip for a while now. Travis Haley, Chris Costa and the current instructors at Magpul Dynamics also use it. There have been former Marines who said their units were trained to use that grip during the 80's.
    2
  34. Madra >"If my religion requires me to sacrifice a virgin to my god once every blood moon, you are restricting my freedom of religion by not allowing me to do so" No, you just go to jail for murder. Nobody stopped you until you committed a crime. By the same logic murder laws are a restriction on the second amendment because you can't just shoot people! Murder laws are anti-2A, more at eleven. >"There are exceptions to these rights no matter how you want to word it, you can't change the definition of a word to your own liking just because it conflicts with your views." No exceptions. If you're able to slander someone, that was because you had the freedom of speech to do it in the first place. There are no limits to rights, you just can't use them to justify criminal action. Rights are "you have the right to this, just don't hide behind me if you fuck it up". You're the one who's twisting the argument to fit your already established views. The concept that a right has "restrictions" if you convict someone of a crime is insane. If a right isn't an universal absolute, then what good is it for?
    1
  35. Mark Massingill >"both times yes, I needed the gun" Could you prove you did before the first time? Can you prove that you'd have died if not for the gun? >"Ignoring the law to get high is not." You're mixing points. You said that there's no need for marijuana. We don't ban something because we don't need it, we ban it because it's been systematically proven to be dangerous/violate the rights of people. >"Seems to me that if you don't want to go to prison, you obey the law" Yeah, go tell that to Rosa Parks. Or the European Jews in WWII.
    1
  36. Mark Massingill Drinking and driving or drunk fights ending up in serious, potential fatal injury happens every single day. Alcohol is still legal. Just because someone uses drugs doesn't mean they endanger other people, the same way that drinking doesn't necessarily mean you become a danger. You took prescription medication. Even the softest pain medication will include warnings to not operate heavy machinery because of the dangers it poses to others. Prescription drugs are involved in more death than illegal drugs. By your logic, you shouldn't have the right to take legal drugs because you could have injured other people or used them to commit suicide? Guns? People might drink and carry guns, by your logic we should ban guns because of what people might do.
    1
  37. How is it an American problem? Literally everyone else makes Black/White arguments to defend whatever... Statism, gun control, communism (usually first world rich teenagers who never lived under communism). Drawing a line in the sand is somehow worse than the crap rhetoric we get exposed to every day? Tell me where the grey is: "I'm not a racist, but...". You can bet that 95% of the sentences that start of like this are racist. There's no grey. "I'm for gender equality, but..." "I'm for gay rights, but..." Unless you're gonna introduce a different subject, the but implies you disagree with the concept you just claimed to agree. We get these undercover antis telling us they believe in gun rights but... Its a way to pretend to be one of us.
    1
  38. Machinshin That's fallacious as hell. We got tons of political parties in Europe but except in places like the UK, it's a two party system. There's the communists, the hard right people, etc that almost nobody votes for and some fringe groups that only secure a couple of seats every election. Then there's two major parties or coalitions that end up winning 31% vs the runner-up's 28%. In my country, it's the Socialist Party and the Social Democrats. One is center-left and the other is center-right. They're almost on top of each other in the political spectrum, but since they're two major parties they bicker instead of working together. >"Imho one must often choose the middlepath in many matters for something good to happen" False Dilemma is a fallacy, but so is Argument to Moderation. If I say the sky is blue and you say it's red, compromising and agreeing that it's purple doesn't solve anything. Gun owners are used to "compromise", ie we had things taken from us without anything being given in return, but eery time a new proposed legislation comes we are told to meet them halfway and compromise. >"I think the main problem is that americans has been taught to choose side all the time." Again, this happens all over the world, and sometimes a side has to be chosen. In a subject that matters to me, staying on the fence is hardly going to do me any good. I may stay on the fence on things that don't matter to me at all, and I'm not going to talk about those often, am I? This gives the appearance that I chose sides on everything, when I only did it on like 10% of the subjects. The other 90% are simply not important enough for me to talk about. So if I care about gun rights, what do I get by staying in the middle ground other than tacitally accepting what the antis want?
    1
  39. spartacon5267 But Liam Neeson can influence the people who vote for politicians. I'm all for him acting as much as he wants, he can fire blank guns at people as much as he wants, but if he's making movies where he is a "good guy with a gun" and making a shitload of money off them maybe he shouldn't be so critical of guns.
    1
  40. spartacon5267 You underestimate how much normal people fawn over celebrities. I mean, get Oprah and Beyonce to support something and you'll have the masses going after them like lemmings.
    1
  41. But can the government staple your lips shut before you enter? No. You are only punished after the fact, and if you cause damages. Yelling fire is not an exception yo the First Amendment. You can say it. But you can't use the 1A as a defense in court. Your false equivalence would be like claiming that you support the 2A but you're against murder. Nowhere in the 2A does it say you have the right to murder anyone, just like the 1A won't save you if you commit slander and you get sued.
    1
  42. Daniel Uoeno Look, nobody said having rights wouldn't let assholes get away with being assholes. You can use freedom of speech to tell offensive jokes, which can be 100% offensive and 0% funny, but until it causes damages it's a right. Having the right to not be subject to unreasonable searches and seizures lets a lot of pedophiles get away with their actions, too. People misuse things they are legally entitled to have. Booze, cars, etc. Are you pointing the finger at drinking laws and the booze manufacturers for allowing people to misuse booze?
    1
  43. An underage person carrying a gun? And on top of that, a person who starts whaling on some random guy on the street?
    1
  44. ***** Sure, but being an idiot doesn't mean you're being irresponsible. You can be an idiot with a car and not be deserving of losing your license, if as a result someone dies because of their own stupidity. Zimmerman made bad choices, sure. But it was Trayvon who got himself in that situation and Zim isn't responsible for that. We tried so hard to make him look like a danger, that now he has become one.
    1
  45. ***** So you mean that if Trayvon had a gun, he should have shot Zimmerman? It's not illegal to walk after someone. It's not illegal to walk with a gun if you have a carry permit valid in the state of Florida. It's not justifiable to kick the everlasting shit out of some guy who didn't do anything. Yeah, Zimmerman's choices affected the outcome. And if you park your car in a place and force someone to park somewhere else and that person dies when a tree falls on the car, your choice also affected the outcome. But you are not responsible for what other people do.
    1
  46. ***** we put him in there. Haven't you heard that if you tell a lie enough times it becomes true? We stalked him. We portrayed him as a baby killer. We forced the prosecution to enter a court case they didn't want because they know they'd lose. We destroyed his personal life and probably his finances. We kept stalking him and judging his every move. We made him dangerous. An applause for humanity and society in general, ladies and gentlemen.
    1
  47. *****  >"stalk" Trayvon Stalking is a form of harassment. You can't claim he did the same to Trayvon. It's not illegal to walk after someone. Or are you claiming that I have the right to shoot anyone who walks behind me? A ton of people walk behind me every day on the subway, am I right in thinking I am being stalked or "chased" by those people? Do I have the right to punch their faces in? >Trayvon who was doing nothing wrong or illegal Assault and battery are not legal. >just getting some skittles i.e. making a type of "lean" suggested by other people. He was going to get high. Look, the kid wasn't buying innocent skittles and he was a fucking creepy misogynistic pig for a 17 year old, wanted to get high, fight people, get in trouble, etc all things that were proven. I can get behind the getting high, it's his body and that dude was nearly a grown man. But codeine abuse fucks you up, despite people not talking about it. Some of the side-effects? Paranoia. Confusion. Distorted visual perceptions. He wasn't an angel and decided to beat the snot out of a man who had a CONCEALED weapon. Trayvon wasn't in fear. He was the aggressor.
    1
  48. ***** so the NRA would defend a thug that beats up people to feel like a man, gets high, is UNDER THE AGE OF LEGAL CARRY, etc? I don't think people who smoke weed should be denied a gun, but currently you can get in trouble for that - if the NRA had defended Trayvon, everyone would talk about Trayvon like they talk about a convicted felon. Nobody actually gives a fuck about Trayvon, they'd get a chance to claim that the NRA defends paranoid criminals and forget about Martin. You really want proof that nobody gives a shit about Martin? How many Trayvons are shot every year in Chicago? Nobody talked about them. And when someone actually talks about those killings, it's just a number. A statistic. A statistic people "suddenly" care about once white kids get shot in a suburban school.
    1
  49. ***** I might have missed the part in which Zimmerman was honored by the NRA and hired as a spokesperson.
    1
  50. ***** Exactly - he wasn't. You used a false dichotomy. And by the way, the shooting was perfectly legit. The prosecution did not want the case and only took it because of public outrage. Had Zimmerman been black, this would have never happened. >he's in jail for using a gun to murder people You might want to check those facts, buddy.
    1