@Phibear94 Don’t worry about me, go give a hug to those mini dick assault rifle -toting insecure little boys who call emselves men #NRA men.
Via a tweet from Huntin/Shootin Nurse @Duck_Hunter7.—Joe]
The problem are guns being stolen from these wannabes who watch the “Terminator” movie and have too small wee wees and run down and blow their wad on the cool blue steel of a handgun then take it home so they can stroke it and fantasize. Of course, not bothering to save any money for the gun safe or even a trigger lock. Then a year later when they are bored of it, they leave it on the dresser in plain sight and the bad guy spies it through the window and breaks in and takes it.
Then a year later the gun is used to kill someone.
What universal checks allow us to do is track the gun back to small wee wee guy who made it available to the criminal element by his irresponsible ownership of it.
April 1, 2015
Comment to Gun background check hearing: Does bill close loophole or create unenforceable law?
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
One might also ask this bigot if he has a citation for the research backing up his claim that this scenario is “the problem” and how background checks would improve his imagined scenario.—Joe]
One has to wonder if he ran the experiment and was disappointed in the results. But I’m pretty sure that he (or she) isn’t interested in experiments, data, and analysis. Childish insults appear to be the epitome of their accomplishments.—Joe]
@andreagrimes first gun nut I see in the grocery store gets slapped up side the head and his tiny penis (aka gun) taken away.
Via email from malroadkill.
Apparently Copeland does not realize they are announcing to the world their intention to commit the crimes of assault, battery, and theft. This also demonstrates Copeland may someday have an excellent chance to earn a Darwin Award.
All of this should surprise no one. Nearly all anti-gun people have crap for brains.—Joe]
I don’t think women have any reason to panic. The article was written by a homosexual man. He seems more than a little bitter toward women at times. He makes some interesting and entertaining points, but I disagree with most of them for the most part.
I can only speak for sure for myself, but I’m pretty sure that the drive among men to solve problems is not a result of wanting to impress women. Sure, for a young buck, that may be a big part of it, but he’ll rarely get very far in his problem solving if he’s distracted by an over-active sex drive. Once you’ve been married for decades and your children have gone on to lead their own lives, and you realize that happiness and sex have virtually nothing do to with one another, the desire to “impress women” (which is idiotic in the first place) goes by the wayside.
Dear ammosexuals, not all gun owners have teensy, tiny peens- most of them are actually nice normal people with perfectly normal sized genitalia. The ones with the 1/10 scale bonzai boners are you clowns who can’t shut the fuck up about your penis extensions and insist on doing stupid things like parading around fast food establishments with the biggest long gun you can find strapped to your back as you scare the shit out of everyone around you in your nonstop quest to validate your childish concept of “freedumb”. If you weren’t such annoying assholes and a danger to the community thanks to your stupid stunts we wouldn’t have any reason to tease you about your miniature manhood. Millions of sportsmen, collectors and other gun enthusiasts manage to go through life without being pushy, obsessive jerks about guns- the day you idjits figure out how to do so too is the day we’ll quit teasing you about your itty bitty dangly bits.
February 12, 2015
Comment to How All Your Favorite Liberal Blogs Muffed The Yoga Pants Bill (Which Does Not Exist)
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
This is what they think of you, freedom, and gun rights activists.—Joe]
Jimmy Kimmel proved once again that not only is he one of the funniest men on TV, but he is also one of the most descent.
July 29, 2015
Jimmy Kimmel chokes up talking about dentist who killed Cecil the lion
[Yes, that last word is exactly as spelled in the original article as of 7/29/2015 8:44 AM PDT. Layers of editorial oversight… And some sort of Freudian slip?
There also is a hint of Markley’s Law in the article as well:
The big question is, why are you shooting a lion in the first place?…Is it that difficult for you to get an erection that you need to kill things?
Demonstrating the mainstream media is continuing its descent into oblivion.—Joe]