I love it... people mocking it for american crap culture. Pop quiz, you are 9 years old, it is 1986, can you name ONE SONG that you know was actually produced outside of the US? Being a kid in that era, you knew nothing of what happened outside out boarders.. there was no internet and the only foreign videos block buster had was horrible dubs released in the US.

And I had all these tapes, i can believe this many awesome songs were all from 1986 though. Pretty amazing year.

A lot of it you can see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986

*videogames *science *animation ... Well, basically all tags!

Was that Braveheart movie clip? If so, then that wasn't in 1986!

Uhhhh, Party All The Time-Eddie Murphy? "How bad could music be" should have been the motto that year....For all the fans here of some of the cheesiest music ever released, 86' was one of the weakest and whitest for pop music-The UK dished-out some real cheese that year as well-

I recall spinning only ONE pop LP that year over and over, Better to Travel-Swing Out Sister, the only new talent worth the mustard, engineered and recorded wonderfully, with a sound that stood out as original without rehash.....The mid eighties were a goat turd for good music.

I mean come ON!? Graceland?? Lionel Ritchie?! Mr. Mister??!

I remember losing all faith in rock and or roll that year and listening to mostly trad jazz and heavy metal for the next 4 years. Pop music hit an all-time low in 1986.

"Don't Give Up" (Duet With Peter Gabriel, 1986)

She's just been awarded a CBE in the Queen's honours list by the way.

Three people I am proud to say I've seen in concert before they died were:-

Freddie Mercury (Queen)

Phil Lynott (Thin Lizzy)

Stuart Adamson (Big Country)

Strangely enough, I saw both Queen & Big Country at the SAME GIG in 1986.

*Chill runs down spine

^Upvoted^

machine guns are classified differently that assault rifles. just sayin. it appears that it is pretty difficult to own a machine gun.
a machine gun is fully auto, large capacity.
submachine gun - same, but shoots pistol bullets.
a quick glance through the web indicates:

to own a machine gun in the states, generally:
1. You must live in a State that will allow you to own a machine gun.
2. You must pass the backgound check.
3. You must find a pre-1986 machine gun and an owner willing to part with it.
4. You must pay the asking price: $5,000 to $50,000.
5. $200. tax.
6. you MUST have an endorsement letter from the local Chief-of-Police or County Sheriff saying that it is 'okay' for you to own a machine gun.

i'm not bothering to verify this info. i'm not a gun nut. but that's what's out there. at least start to get the language correct. an assault rifle IS NOT classified as a "machine gun".

Starting from 1986 all new cars had to be able to run on unleaded petrol, but the actual end date for sale varied according to where you were... but around 2002 (it was pretty uncommon anyway once most cars ran on unleaded, I thought it had been phased out years earlier). Given that there is a 20 year lag between changing lead levels and behavioural changes, it should be showing up starting from 2006.

Lead based house paint hasn't been common since 1970 (source).

Which figures did you find fishy?

total straw man.
and her presentation is quite bland.
that being said:

assault rifles were banned in 1986 yet people can still get a hold of them if they really want.so how is more stringent gun control going to affect the sale and possession of assault rifles?

furthermore,how is putting stricter rules going to change anything with people who are already in compliance?

if the argument was directed at the NRA,which is just a powerful lobby for gun manufacturers hiding behind the second amendment,then i would be more prone to side with you folks...but the argument (appears to me anyways) is directed at the private citizen,who is already in compliance.

i hate to go all blankfist on you guys but that smacks of statism.

or is that a reality you all are comfortable with?
that the only people armed in this country would be police and military.

and i am not just referring to this thread but including almost every argument i have seen lately.
am i misunderstanding the argument?

You should watch the movie. It's campy, but freaking hilarious.

On topic: That clip SCREAMED 1986. Pink walls.. leg warmers.. need I say more?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Sam Kinison' to 'Sam Kinison, snl, 1986' - edited by PlayhousePals

>> ^NetRunner:

@jimnms I think the right lesson to take from the example of Brazil is "gun control laws need to be properly enforced to reduce homicide", not "gun control laws never reduce gun crime."
Also, you're wrong about gun shows, there's a pretty big loophole. From wikipedia:

U.S. federal law requires persons engaged in interstate firearm commerce, or those who are "engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, to hold a Federal Firearms License and perform background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System maintained by the FBI prior to transferring a firearm. Under the terms of the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, however, individuals "not engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, or who only make "occasional" sales within their state of residence, are under no requirement to conduct background checks on purchasers or maintain records of sale (although even private sellers are forbidden under federal law from selling firearms to persons they have reason to believe are felons or otherwise prohibited from purchasing firearms).

In other words, you can always just say you're a private seller, and sell guns at gunshows without doing background checks or recording the sale.
There are videos, sifted right here on Videosift, of people going and buying guns at gunshows while literally saying to the seller "I don't need a background check, right? 'Cause I probably couldn't pass one" with the seller replying with some form of "no problem, here's your gun".
But more than anecdotal video evidence, there's also a been series of studies about drug cartels moving serious amounts of guns using straw purchases at gun shows.
Yet for some reason you're calling Moyers a liar for saying the same thing.
Also, the Assault Weapons Ban set the maximum legal size of a single clip at 10 rounds. IIRC, this latest shooting featured the shooter using a barrel mag with over 100. That used to be illegal. Also, the Tuscon shooting featured a shooter using 2 guns with 30-round clips -- and he was stopped when he had to reload.
Personally, I don't quite understand the anti-gun control side of the argument. Say banning assault weapons only reduces the number of people killed by gun violence by 1.6%. That's still what, a few thousand people's lives a year? Why is having assault weapons legal for civilians worth the deaths of a thousand people a year? Why would it be worth the death of even one person a year? You can still have a pistol, a hunting rife, a shotgun, etc., you just can't have a high-velocity, large-magazine firearm. What exactly is the harm in making that illegal?


That's not a loophole in gun shows, private sales and transfer of firearms are not regulated in some states. You can't set up a booth and sell guns at a gun show unless you are a licensed gun dealer. And you certainly aren't going to walk in and buy a fully automatic assault rifle without showing ID or getting a background check. If a person legally has a fully automatic weapon, they have to have a class 3 federal firearms license and register the weapon with the ATF. If they sell that weapon, the person they are selling it to must also have a class 3 firearms license and the transfer of the weapon must be reported to the ATF.

I've seen the videos you speak of and I read the report you linked. It's good that the ATF is doing their job and cracking down on those douchbags dealers. What you said about Brazil, "gun control laws need to be properly enforced to reduce homicide", not "gun control laws never reduce gun crime.", can be said about the U.S. also.

The assault weapon ban limited pistols magazines to 10 rounds and rifles to 30 rounds. This also only applied to weapons and magazines manufactured or imported before the 1994 law went into effect. He still could purchase the high capacity magazine if it was manufactured or imported before the law went into effect, or he could have purchased it illegally.

People are still confused about what an assault rifle is. The definition of an assault rifle is a gun that can fire full auto or in bursts, and generally uses a shorter, less powerful cartridge than a battle rifle. The guns the media so ignorantly call assault rifles are NOT assault rifles. They look like their military assault rifle counterpart, fire the same round, but the internals are different. They only fire in semi-automatic and can not be modified to fire full auto.

If "assault weapons" were the least used weapons in violent crimes, why go after them when according to the DOJ the effect on crime is "too small for reliable measurement, because assault weapons are rarely used in gun crimes." The guns most preferred by criminals are small caliber (.25, .38 an 9mm) easily concealed pistols with magazines of 7 or less. So what do they do? They ban "assault rifles" and big magazines. Does that make any sense? It's just politics to appease the mass stupids by banning big scary looking guns.

Lets apply the same logic used by legalize drug crowd (which I'm all for). Pot and other drugs are illegal. There are laws against the sale and possession of these drugs, yet people still get them. Ban all guns, and people will still get them, only it will just criminals with guns. Both England and Australia have banned private ownership of guns, and their crime rates went up because the only people left with guns were criminals [1][2][3][4]. Why don't we give that a try here, because it worked so well for them.

@jimnms I think the right lesson to take from the example of Brazil is "gun control laws need to be properly enforced to reduce homicide", not "gun control laws never reduce gun crime."

Also, you're wrong about gun shows, there's a pretty big loophole. From wikipedia:

U.S. federal law requires persons engaged in interstate firearm commerce, or those who are "engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, to hold a Federal Firearms License and perform background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System maintained by the FBI prior to transferring a firearm. Under the terms of the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, however, individuals "not engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, or who only make "occasional" sales within their state of residence, are under no requirement to conduct background checks on purchasers or maintain records of sale (although even private sellers are forbidden under federal law from selling firearms to persons they have reason to believe are felons or otherwise prohibited from purchasing firearms).

In other words, you can always just say you're a private seller, and sell guns at gunshows without doing background checks or recording the sale.

There are videos, sifted right here on Videosift, of people going and buying guns at gunshows while literally saying to the seller "I don't need a background check, right? 'Cause I probably couldn't pass one" with the seller replying with some form of "no problem, here's your gun".

But more than anecdotal video evidence, there's also a been series of studies about drug cartels moving serious amounts of guns using straw purchases at gun shows.

Yet for some reason you're calling Moyers a liar for saying the same thing.

Also, the Assault Weapons Ban set the maximum legal size of a single clip at 10 rounds. IIRC, this latest shooting featured the shooter using a barrel mag with over 100. That used to be illegal. Also, the Tuscon shooting featured a shooter using 2 guns with 30-round clips -- and he was stopped when he had to reload.

Personally, I don't quite understand the anti-gun control side of the argument. Say banning assault weapons only reduces the number of people killed by gun violence by 1.6%. That's still what, a few thousand people's lives a year? Why is having assault weapons legal for civilians worth the deaths of a thousand people a year? Why would it be worth the death of even one person a year? You can still have a pistol, a hunting rife, a shotgun, etc., you just can't have a high-velocity, large-magazine firearm. What exactly is the harm in making that illegal?

>> ^probie:

Saw this in the theaters. Everybody gasped and laughed when Spike cursed.
edit: Holy shit, I've got to watch this again. Been so long.


Same people did the same thing when Data did the exact same thing in ST:Generations.

>> ^probie:

Saw this in the theaters. Everybody gasped and laughed when Spike cursed.MPAA gave this a PG rating?