haha! the number of deaths in UK and USA are just a little factoid?

tell that to their loved ones, motherfucker!

Sorry, you unhinged piece of shit, the 2nd Amendment is not sacrosanct, neither is any amendment or anything in the Constitution. That's why they're called amendments.

The more you know.

For those on the sift who are for unrestricted access to guns: At the very least I hope you can acknowledge that Alex Jones made you guys look very...very irrational and deranged. It wasn't exactly a shining moment for your side I hope you can admit.

It cracks me up that Piers didn't have to say anything, he let Jones hang himself with his own rope.

Glenn Beck recently denounced Alex Jones as being a deranged psycho, & when Beck is calling you a madman & being identified as the voice of reason you know you're in trouble.

don't put words in my mouth. I never said that there is no point in being able to defend oneself. The strawman argument is that the goal is to take all weapons away. no rational person is making that argument.

the reality is that guns are romanticized in America. The reality is that this clouds our judgement.

your second statement is also putting words in my mouth. I never said the CCW went in with "blazing" guns. They were lucky that's all.They were lucky they were there, they were lucky the shooter ran, they were lucky the shooter's gun jammed. They were lucky the shooter didn't have another gun. These things are not hard to grasp.

Can a CCW make a difference...of course it *CAN* It doesn't mean you rely on it. It doesn't mean you shove more guns into peoples hands and just hope it all works out for the best.

the article could be biased/slanted whatever but it has plenty of grains of truth. The odds are in your favor if you run. The odds are in your favor if you hide. It takes a hell of a lot of persistent training to obtain that muscle memory. It takes training to fight the natural urge to freeze up or to panic.

Is it an obtainable goal? sure! What people are actually advocating is that there be increased requirements for someone to obtain and keep a weapon. Thus reducing the odds that some deranged individual is going to get one.

There is no magic way of stopping this stuff from ever happening, but the reality is that if you can reduce the number of guns in circulation, you reduce the odds of someone getting a gun and doing something harmful with it. If you increase the requirements of what it takes to obtain and keep a gain, you reduce the amount of untrained wannabe gunslingers out there and increase the odds that if someone does have a gun, they are trained to use it wisely.

Bottom line is that you have a right to bear arms, but with that right comes a responsibility. I hear a lot of people talking about rights, but precious few talking about responsibility. You might want to think about that.

Sooo, by the sounds of it, we have an insane person who took offence at this guy stopping suddenly, which caused him to have to slam on his breaks.

And that's it, that's enough to make you flip out to that degree? Some people are seriously deranged, seriously need some help.

But bravo Today Tonight for taking what is an interesting and fairly scary story, and going batshit crazy on the fear mongering at the end by trying to say that road rage is mentally out of control by showing clips of road rage from all over the world implying these are all recent Australian road rage incidents, and we should all fear for our lives.

Bravo Today tonight, you just keep on with your journalistic integrity.

Dicks.

Nope. I think all forms of regulation will have little to no effect given how widespread guns are. As I said, there will be no improvement in this lifetime for the US and people need to accept it.

Even in the impossible scenario that guns were largely banned nationwide and a generous guns for cash scheme was put in place, which is what has happened in some other countries, it would take decades for any meaningful effect to be felt.

Which is why my original post said that if you are genuinely concerned about this, there is no alternative to emigrating.

The issue is not Newtown, Virginia Tech, Collumbine or any freak killsprees of any of the deranged people you mentioned. The issue is the steady but reliably high murder rate enabled by the high supply of guns in the market.

These public incidents have done little to nothing more than giving pundits and casual observers an excuse to get high on their own cathartic tear gushing.

The question is, what ground do you have to make *any* knowledge claim? If you can't tell me even one thing you know for certain, then what do you actually know? As I gave in my example, if you asked someone what time it is and they said I think it's 3 pm, do they actually know it?

The point is that we do know things, and we operate in a world of certainty, but the only way to justify that knowledge is by pointing to God. You can't justify it by pointing to yourself.

I happily admit that there is a theoretical possibility that everything is a computer program designed to deceive me into believing a particular state of affairs, but as a sane person, I go about life assuming that my senses do a pretty good job of telling me about the world around me. If you have difficulty with this, you are deranged.

Do everyones senses work equally well? Is everyones reasoning equally valid? If you're satisfied with circular reasoning, ie, that your senses are valid because your senses tell you they're valid, then you should have no problem with the argument that God exists because He exists.

So outright, I reject the notion that there is any need for absolute certainty, much less that someone's imaginary friend they keep telling me about can provide it.

There is when making knowledge claims. Again, if you can't make any, what do you actually know?

Reality is invariably self consistent, the coincidence of that alone is enough to convince me to pay attention to people who do their darndest to understand it (reality) and do my darndest to understand it myself.

What's your theory about why it should it be "self-consistent", or comprehensible by human beings at all?

And no, even if there is some way to improve our current degree of certainty by the ten to the power of negative eighty two percent we lack to achieve absolute certainty, then you don't get to arbitrarily claim that God is that way because a book says he knows everything. And especially not if you had a personal revelation.

That isn't the argument. The argument is, there are only two routes to truth. One is that you're omnipotent. Two is revelation from an omnipotent being. Everyone else is living in a world of uncertainty and does not really know anything. The argument is, without God, you can't prove anything.

My buddy Shane told me yesterday that the buck stops with him, and he was simply born with complete omniscience. He knows absolutely everything. He's coming over to dinner tomorrow, if you stop by my place he can tell you about it too. It's crazy, some weird and rare genetic defect from what I understand. But I'll tell you, boy am I glad he has that defect because if he didn't, I'd only be about 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure that it's a bad idea to get shot in the head by an AK 47. I mean, you never know. There are times when I want to test those odds.

I'm sure you could name any number of situations where it seems very likely that you know something, but the question remains, how do you prove it? You don't have any proof for your claims no matter how obvious they may seem.

Whether or not we can know anything for certain to such an extreme is a functionally useless question to start with, I like to think of it as the Sudoku of philosophy - for some it is fun and maybe challenging to work through, it might even make someone feel vaguely intellectual when they're watching an action flick, but it is otherwise utterly pointless.

I happily admit that there is a theoretical possibility that everything is a computer program designed to deceive me into believing a particular state of affairs, but as a sane person, I go about life assuming that my senses do a pretty good job of telling me about the world around me. If you have difficulty with this, you are deranged.

So outright, I reject the notion that there is any need for absolute certainty, much less that someone's imaginary friend they keep telling me about can provide it.

Reality is invariably self consistent, the coincidence of that alone is enough to convince me to pay attention to people who do their darndest to understand it (reality) and do my darndest to understand it myself.

And no, even if there is some way to improve our current degree of certainty by the ten to the power of negative eighty two percent we lack to achieve absolute certainty, then you don't get to arbitrarily claim that God is that way because a book says he knows everything. And especially not if you had a personal revelation.

My buddy Shane told me yesterday that the buck stops with him, and he was simply born with complete omniscience. He knows absolutely everything. He's coming over to dinner tomorrow, if you stop by my place he can tell you about it too. It's crazy, some weird and rare genetic defect from what I understand. But I'll tell you, boy am I glad he has that defect because if he didn't, I'd only be about 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure that it's a bad idea to get shot in the head by an AK 47. I mean, you never know. There are times when I want to test those odds.

>> ^TangledThorns:

Someday our children will learn that climate change is the greatest hoax of the 21st century and allowed other more real and serious environmental problems go ignored till it was too late.


Not fucking likely. Someday children will look back with the same revulsion we feel she we discuss slavers and wonder how we could possibly have let it get so bad and then, when presented with overwhelming evidence, how deranged morons like you could respond with "fuck it, let's just accelerate into this clusterfuck"

But hey, I don't have kids, and frankly I've given up trying to make a difference and educate you and you ilk, so fuck it, bring on the climate disaster. It'll kill a whole heap of people and the planet will be a really unpleasant place for a few centuries, but maybe it's a lesson we need to learn.

>> ^TangledThorns:

Yeah, I'm gonna vote alright and that's for Romney/Ryan. Main reasons are I disagree with Obama's anti-business collectivist rhetoric and Biden is just a dunce.


Great! You're willing to hand the country over to deranged, terrified, habitually mistaken and ignorant, intellectually and morally bankrupt pathological liars because you think the VP is an idiot and Obama's not far enough into the extreme right.

What a winner.

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

I'm very surprised the officer did not get out of the car with his gun drawn. I know were suppose to be a gun tolerant society but how did that officer know that they were not about to go on some kind of rampage?

You think they might be deranged and your plan to calm them down is to pull a gun on them? You may want to rethink that.

One of the Emerald City's more colorfully deranged personalities. =o/

@2:47 "This is not true and this is deranged thinking"

Yeah, pretty much.

This is also not a "commercial/pop-culture product/release".

*nochannel *wtf *gay *sexuality *politics *comedy *talks

>> ^A10anis:
@ Shinyblurry's post starting with "Your welcome" (didn't quote the lot of it because i don't want that dribble being repeated below my post)

Your hypothetical story used to make a point about how you make yourself feel better was quite disturbing. Under the same logic you employed there.. if someone told you "kill 1000 babies" and all suffering would end for eternity, your story would only encourage an idiot to be a horrific murderer because of some deranged persons words.

Actually, the point of the hypothetical was to show the sloppy reasoning inherent in digging for treasure in a spot marked other than X.

>> ^A10anis:
You state "The only thing which is stopping you is pride.". No, it's the use of intelligence.
* It's not believing things because they make me feel better, or allowing me to think less because i can say magic did it.

So, how is you believing that you have a superior intellect to someone who believes in God not pride?

>> ^A10anis:
* It's the love of actually thinking about situations from a 'likely/unlikely true based on scientific reasoning' position, which is what drives human advancements forward.

Since there is no empirical evidence for or against Gods existence, how do you calculate how likely or unlikely His existence is?

>> ^A10anis:
* It's not naively thinking or pretending there are great things to learn from a disgusting book of prejudice, torture, fear and horror (i.e. kill your loved ones because you hear voices or let towns rape your daughters because they're of less value than a male stranger).

The bible, apart from the revelation of God, is a historical account of the actions of fallen men. Men who were sinners and sometimes did things which were morally wrong. That there was no effort to cover up those sins is a point in favor, not against.


>> ^A10anis:
* It's not believing claims that a book is an accurate account of history and the universe, when it gets the most basic things a God would know wrong, coincidentally these claims are just the way things would appear to a human's untrained eye (sun revolving around the planet).

If you want to address the accuracy of the bible, you must first accurately portray the bible. My guess is that you have only studied the bible through the lens of skeptics. Do you know the actual history of how this idea came about? The bible does not say the sun revolves around the earth, but it was interpreted that way by Claudius Ptolemy in the 2nd century. Claudius proposed a theory of geocentricity, which at the time, was far more accurate than the existing theory of heliocentricity, and he interpreted certain passages of scripture to support his assertion. These passages, specifically Joshua 10:12-14, and Psalm 93:1, do not teach geocentricity at all, but were taken out of context by Claudius and others to promote the theory.

>> ^A10anis:
* It's because the bible (unbelievable in it's own right), once claimed to be a book of literal truth, becomes more and more metaphorical as science stomps its way all over the human races ignorance of the universe reaching greater level's of understandings that are testable through mathematical predictions.

The scientific theories which contradict the literal truth of the bible, such as the theory of deep time, macro evolution, and abiogenesis, are not subject to empirical testing. You cannot prove these theories in a lab. They are inferences based on circumstantial evidence, and are not truly scientific. You must *believe* them, and real science is based on knowledge, not belief.

>> ^A10anis:
Quote "Yet, it wasn't evidence at all, it was simply what I preferred to be true.". Seems like not much has changed, except your preferences.

Your preaching is nothing more than the same unjustified crap that those who don't have facts to support them continue to make. IMO you've either given up on your critical analytical abilities, or you're a troll copy/pasting.. given how similar your sentences are to other preachers.

What changed is that I fairly investigated the claims of Jesus Christ, instead of dismissing them based on a superficial knowledge of Christianity. When I did that, I received supernatural evidence that they were true.

>> ^A10anis:
Christianity is a sacrificial cult, full of unsubstantiated claims.

Your gross mischaracterization not withstanding, how have you investigated the claims of Jesus Christ?

>> ^A10anis:
Jesus's so called miracles appear in many other religions, usually descriptively to the letter.

Have any actual evidence to support this claim? Be sure to include the original sources and not just the claims of skeptics.

>> ^A10anis:
Your beliefs come from a time where women were valued as little more than a discard-able possessions.

Galatians 3:28

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Scripture teaches that woman have the same value in the eyes of God as men do. God has assigned us different roles, but he shows no partiality between men and women.

>> ^A10anis:
And If your God did exist, then said God can go fuck themselves, as i have no desire to follow the direction and teachings of a psychopathic asshole.

I would suggest it is the distorted lens through which you see God that informs your negative opinion of Him.

>> ^A10anis:
PS: although I'm not censoring myself too much, it's not my primary intention to offend you (but don't care too much either), just can't stand how people spouting this type of content can think they 'should' be taken seriously.

Atheists rarely censor themselves when they speak to Christians. Nothing you've said here is unexpected. I do not take offense at what you said; on the contrary, I care about you as a human being made in the image of God, and I see you as being worthy of love and respect. My hope is that you come to know the love of Jesus Christ. You simply have no experience of God at the moment, but God is willing to show you He is there at any time. He loves you more deeply than you understand. Draw near to Him and He will draw near to you.

@ Shinyblurry's post starting with "Your welcome" (didn't quote the lot of it because i don't want that dribble being repeated below my post)

Your hypothetical story used to make a point about how you make yourself feel better was quite disturbing. Under the same logic you employed there.. if someone told you "kill 1000 babies" and all suffering would end for eternity, your story would only encourage an idiot to be a horrific murderer because of some deranged persons words.

You state "The only thing which is stopping you is pride.". No, it's the use of intelligence.
* It's not believing things because they make me feel better, or allowing me to think less because i can say magic did it.
* It's the love of actually thinking about situations from a 'likely/unlikely true based on scientific reasoning' position, which is what drives human advancements forward.
* It's not naively thinking or pretending there are great things to learn from a disgusting book of prejudice, torture, fear and horror (i.e. kill your loved ones because you hear voices or let towns rape your daughters because they're of less value than a male stranger).
* It's not believing claims that a book is an accurate account of history and the universe, when it gets the most basic things a God would know wrong, coincidentally these claims are just the way things would appear to a human's untrained eye (sun revolving around the planet).
* It's because the bible (unbelievable in it's own right), once claimed to be a book of literal truth, becomes more and more metaphorical as science stomps its way all over the human races ignorance of the universe reaching greater level's of understandings that are testable through mathematical predictions.

Quote "Yet, it wasn't evidence at all, it was simply what I preferred to be true.". Seems like not much has changed, except your preferences.

Your preaching is nothing more than the same unjustified crap that those who don't have facts to support them continue to make. IMO you've either given up on your critical analytical abilities, or you're a troll copy/pasting.. given how similar your sentences are to other preachers.

Christianity is a sacrificial cult, full of unsubstantiated claims.
Jesus's so called miracles appear in many other religions, usually descriptively to the letter.
Your beliefs come from a time where women were valued as little more than a discard-able possessions.
And If your God did exist, then said God can go fuck themselves, as i have no desire to follow the direction and teachings of a psychopathic asshole.

PS: although I'm not censoring myself too much, it's not my primary intention to offend you (but don't care too much either), just can't stand how people spouting this type of content can think they 'should' be taken seriously.

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^Tokoki:
I don't know about you, but there's no way, if that chainsaw is running, that I'm going anywhere near close to that guy even to try to get him down.
Now, when he's down already...that's another story ;-)

Nah, i'd definitely chuck stuff. I'm just glad he wasn't actually trying to hurt anyone, because this could have been an utter massacre. In fact, could have been one if people hadn't forced him off guard by attacking him.


Oh...definitely. Good think that people did this. I'm just saying, *I* likely would have been one of the ones running away! Can't imagine myself picking up a chair and throwing it, while in the bar (with few places to hide/run) and getting the attention of a deranged man with a running chainsaw!