Gun Control

Friday Funnies: Gun Free Zone

|

|||

NEXT: New Bipartisan Legislation Would Make Federal Sentences Less Mindlessly Punitive

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Steve Forbes seems to be taking his impending doom in stride. But othering an illiterate ninja might not be the way to go.

  2. If he went to a public school, no, he might not be able to read

  3. Stop making fun of Obama’s ISIL strategy!
    *SLAP!*

    1. *slap!*

      1. *SLAP!*

        1. *slap!*

  4. If you change the sign, it also works to parody open borders.

    1. Now THAT’S funny!

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

      /sage

    2. What we can do about mass shootings, build walls around everyplace!

    3. Or closed borders, for that matter.

  5. I don’t get it.

    Awful, therefore, perfect. Actually, this is less-than-fully awful, so it’s not quite perfect. Which is perfect.

    Happy fucking Friday, Reasonoids.

    I hope you’re all shot on the college campus not of your choice, or choke to death while swallowing an olive with your Rusty Woodchipper (because olives are not called for with that drink, and you’re a dink for having an olive, so you deserve to choke to death).

    1. Well that’s not very nice! *glares at Almanian*

      1. enjoy your olive

    2. Somebody is all grumpy this morning.

    3. Yet another reason I only drink beer and straight whiskey.

    4. doubt I’ll be shot on the college campus of my choice…. because I’ll be carrying my own vessel of retribution. Against campus policy, for sure, but since I am no longer a student there the only thing they can do is “ask” me to leave their property, which I’ll gladly do. When I was a student I risked expulsion, at which point I’d have sued. But it did not happen. Which made every Friday a pretty near perfect Friday.

  6. I have a busy day so read this you animals.

  7. Those drawings of scary guns are a violation of the No Tolerance policy. Bok is suspended until next Friday.

    Happy Friday, Gents.

    1. hey!

      1. PWND!

      2. If you are a Lady (or one of the new fangled genders folks claim to be now-a-days)

        Happy Friday to you, as well.

  8. Another college shooting being reported this morning:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..niversity/

    1. “The university’s weapons policy bans students from openly carrying firearms without explicit permission from the school.”

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..2030a1f581

    2. NIU’s policy not as bad as others, but still awful.
      https://nau.edu/police/policies/weapons/

    3. Eh… It’s flyover country so I don’t really care if pro-gun zealots make it easier to shoot up the place or your neighbors. Bo, did you see yesterday in California in a city with tough gun laws that the guy who saved all those people on that french train was attacked with a knife? It probably would have been better for all concerned if everyone was carrying a bazooka.

  9. REQUIRES ADDITIONAL INFORMATIVE TEXT ON OBJECTS!

    1. Better?

      GUNFREE ZONE
      CLEAR PLASTIC EGG WITH REVOLVER INSIDE
      Gunfree is selling said eggs in that zone over there

      UNKNOWN
      UNKNOWN
      UNKNOWN
      Looking for clear eggs with revolvers in them

      MALE
      45
      CAUCASIAN
      Giving directions to egg zone

      1. Well, now I know what the reason comments do to XML.

        Please ignore the previous message. It was funnier with the XML tags, which were removed.

  10. Related (vaguely): A good person with a gun does bad:

    http://www.freep.com/story/new…../73468588/

    Police confirmed on Wednesday that a concealed pistol license (CPL) holder was not being threatened by a fleeing shoplifter when she decided to fire multiple shots at him in a Home Depot parking lot.

    And experts interviewed Wednesday doubted the shooting could have been justified.

    “It’s my worst nightmare as a CPL instructor,” said Doreen Hankins, owner of Detroit Arms, which holds CPL classes. “You have to know the entire situation before you pull that handgun out. And I don’t see that a shoplifter at Home Depot fills any of those criteria.”

    1. Actually she randomly fired shots at the vehicle that the shoplifter got in (dumb, dumb, DUMB!) and apparently didn’t hit anyone.

      If a cop had done this Reason would be all over it.

      1. My guess is she was shooting at the tire, since she flattened one of the tires.

        1. She fired “multiple shots” so it seems more likely that one of them just randomly hit the tire.

          1. Not much of a shooter huh. You know you can fire multiple shots at the same target (the tire) right?

            1. It’s possible she fired multiple shots at the tire and only hit it once. But from the available information that’s not the most likely conclusion.

              Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

      2. There’s no disputing what this person did was idiotic, but I think differential coverage of cops doing this sort of thing is warranted. They’re supposed to be professionals and public servants after all.

        1. This isn’t a matter of poor execution that can be chalked up to amateurism, it’s a matter of choosing to put innocent people’s lives at risk. Either cops are held to the same standard as “civilians” under the law or they’re not.

          1. Cops should be held to a *higher* standard imo. After all, they’re given a higher level of privileges and authority.

            1. When it comes to execution of their duties, yes. Not when it comes to something like this.

              1. Not a regular Reason reader either, huh.

            2. And lots more training not to do this.

          2. They’re not. This lady will be put through the ringer, have no Union protection, and won’t be paid while on trial. Also she can’t ask for a bench trial with a judge she works with.

            1. Pretty sure she can ask for a bench trial, same as a cop.

              1. With a judge she works with? Sweet. She’ll be out in no time.

                1. That doesn’t even make any sense. Unless they’re moonlighting as court clerks or bailiffs, cops don’t “work with” judges.

                  If you’re claiming that there’s some special relationship because they’re part of the same justice system and/or because they appear in court a lot, then scads of other professions are also “working with” judges and they can all request bench trials.

                  1. It’s called ‘professional courtesy.’

                    Cops aren’t afraid to go before judges anymore than judges are afraid to get pulled over. They both know they’re going to get special treatment.

                  2. I’ve worked many a courtroom and judges absolutely work with the cops. Also, one of the juror challenges in Texas is whether you have faith that the p’leece are always telling the truth. Doubt that and you’re out the side door with the hippies, brown people, atheists and mexicanos.

              2. with a judge she works with

                Missed that, eh?

            2. Also she can’t ask for a bench trial with a judge she works with.

              Or a jury trial with a couple dozen of armed, uniformed cops in the audience, staring coldly at the jury.

      3. That’s because if a cop had done, the cop would have faced no consequences. This lady will face consequences.

        People, whether they are cops are not, are going to do dumb things. That’s reality. The government can’t stop that. The best it can do is impose consequences on those people.

    2. What a fucking idiot. Enjoy your prison time.

      1. This wouldn’t fly even in Florida. It has to be a forcible felony and the perp has to be confronting you.

    3. Hankins, the owner of Detroit Arms, said of the shooting, “None of it makes sense. Even if it were law enforcement, they wouldn’t do that.”

      AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

    4. Yeah. Just goes to show that no amount of training can cure congenital idiocy.

  11. It reminds me of that skit I saw on Youtube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7pGt_O1uM8

  12. As to the cartoon, what in the world is that supposed to be directly under his tie/above his pants?

    1. Symptoms of chlamydia?

    2. A serious cummerbund fail.

    3. Looks like the tentacle from Day of the Tentacle.

  13. Once again confirming the Friday Funnies as a laugh-free zone.

  14. We can’t have a gun-free zone without a gun-free nation.

    1. Now you get it. Get rid of gun free zones.

      1. I say get rid of guns.

        But I agree with all of you that if we are going to have guns, then get rid of all gun laws.
        Any gun law is STUPID with the presence of so many guns.

        The idea that you can keep guns out of the hands of retards (sandy hook shooting), crazies (Movie house shooting), or people that appear normal, have a crisis and then use a gun IS SILLY.

        If you want to have guns, fine, we’ll live with the crime, the random shootings, and the occasional self defense.

        We will have EXPONENTIALLY more problems with guns, not less. And, we are seeing it all over the country.

        The NRA was right to push for government not to track gun violence or incidents. The facts would (and do) speak for themselves.

  15. We should probably make it mandatory for students at junior high school to concealed carry because it will make everyone safer.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MS91knuzoOA

    1. How about those cowardly kindergarten and 1st grade students at the Sandy Hook Elementary school that didn’t rush the shooter as prescribed by our friend Benny Carson.

      1. Your missing the point, librul asshole, and that is that we should start training 2-year olds to fire a glockenspiel so they’ll be safer at school.

        1. Haha… A glock… Not a glockenspiel, but that will work too.

        2. A person who knows his/her target is armed will mitigate that fact.

      2. I suppose you think you are being witty. What Carson was saying is that when faced with imiment death you might consider trying to do something instead of going quietly into the night. Only a Progressive would try to demean what was a valid point.

        1. I know what he said. And had just a hand-full of those cowardly kids had attacked the shooter, many other kids would had survived.

          I’m surprised libertarians take this stand. Usually you guys are for the “I’m in it for me and fuck everyone else.”

  16. The 2nd Amendment was put into our Constitution to protect the people from the Federal Government. It is the same reason that federal troops are not suppose to be deployed on American soil. The majority of those that fought in the Revolutionary War were Scot-Irish and were sick of being ruled by tyrants. All governments are fearful of the people being able to defend themselves. You can look at what our government did to Blacks, Mexicans and Indians to see why the average citizen defends the 2nd Amendment. The Federal Government is considered the world’s biggest bully. If it were not for the 300,000,000 guns in private hands do you really think this country would still be a free. If you do you have a much lower standard of freedom than I do

    1. The government is fully capable of going after every citizen with guns.

      The government has satellites, drones, airplanes, personnel, and the ability to financially ruin anyone.

      This is why people like me say the 2nd Amendment is useless. There’s no meaningful way of us (as an individual, a family, a militia, or caucus) to be able to protect ourselves from the the Government.

      And I don’t believe one second that the red-blooded gun owning american gives two shits of what happened to blacks, mexicans, and indians.

  17. OT: Was re-reading a fantasy novel from my childhood and came across this quote:

    Beware the engineers of society, I say, who would make everyone in all the world equal. Opportunity should be equal, must be equal, but achievement must remain individual.
    – Drizzt Do’Urden

    Evidently my libertarian views were being influenced well before I read Atlas Shrugged.

    1. Of course, Drizzt would understand liberty much better than most, having increased his personal freedom immensely after leaving Drow society. I wonder if Drizzt’s race was modeled on a specific type of human archetype..

      Drow were taught from an early age to trust no one, forging alliances only when they were confident that they could outmatch their ally if he/she decided to turn on them. The inherent pride in their own abilities quite often led to such alliances being forged, though they almost always ended badly when one party decided said alliance was no longer convenient. Even drow who escaped the cruelties of the Underdark found it more difficult to form long-term friendships than most races do.

  18. Why have laws since some people don’t obey laws, right?

    Burglary-free zone
    Shoplifting-free zone
    Speeding-free zone
    Assault-free zone
    Murder-free zone
    Crime-free zone

    Hey, we don’t need laws. Just ask the NRA. Their all-purpose solution to gun violence: No laws.

    1. This fallacy has been creeping up frequently for the past couple of years, so I’ll bite.

      The actual crimes you detail are all crimes against a person (“speeding” is not a crime in any meaningful sense of the term, though negligent driving is). Murder harms an individual; we have a law to protect the individual from murder and compensate his family in the event of a murder. Battery harms an individual; we have a law to protect the individual from battery and compensate him should such occur.

      Gun-free zones do not deter crime; they encourage it by removing a disincentive for coercion. Gun-free zones do not protect law-abiding individuals; they render them helpless toward the physically strong or armed criminal. If you can understand why a law preventing people from wearing helmets while riding a motorcycle would put their lives in danger, you should be able to understand why a law preventing people from defending their persons with firearms would also endanger them while encouraging aggression from sociopaths.

      The most insidious aspect of legislation like this is that the individual who does choose to protect himself in violation of the law now must not only worry about a higher likelihood of assault ceteris paribus by criminals who falsely believe him to be defenseless, but also harassment and arrest by LEOs.

  19. A customer at Waffle House in South Carolina shot an armed robber this morning. I’m sure it will lead to more calls for gun laws, as now some poor violent criminal (who I’m sure was only trying to feed his wife and family) has been harmed by a cruel, heartless citizen in a violent display of lack of passion.

  20. So, what’s happening in the Democratic People’s Republic of the Congo these days? There are no private guns in a communist paradise, so no massacres either, right?

  21. So, what’s happening in the Democratic People’s Republic of the Congo these days? There are no private guns in a communist paradise, so no massacres either, right?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.