Gun control

Seriously... the only reason that you anti-gun people have the freedom to openly speak your opinion about ANYTHING is because we have a 2nd Amendment which so eloquently GUARANTEES the RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL to BEAR ARMS!! Not billy clubs arms. Not pepper spray arms. ALL ARMS.

Think about that the next time you start spewing off your liberal opinions to your buddies. You can do it without fear of retribution because enought PEOPLE have ARMS to keep this place FREE.

You all need a history lesson.... no, you are too busy with your faces buried in a fantasy land video game while the real world is happening outside around you. Target shooting on the monitor doesn't count when they come calling at your door because you violated some free speech policy and want to put you in a re-education camp. Steel triggers are much different than plastic joysticks.

You're twisting your arguments so much that they probably make sense for yourself. And yeah, I actually feel that the criminal deserves to live just as much as I do. It's called humanity. And that's what I mean with black and white. You think the people who do crime are evil and should be wiped away. Think again. No wait, you can't.

Listen Freddy... the only reason that Hitler did NOT invade your country was because every household had a military class firearm. Sure utopian fantasy of peaceful fields of daisys are nice, but it is a fantasy. There has always been a dark side to humanity and it will probably always exist. Until it doesn't, the only thing keeping evil at bay is equalization through armament.

Stick to the fantasy games and leave real life to real men.

I shot a gun once. It was a bb gun, but a gun nonetheless. I was shooting pop cans off a fence. I hit about 6 out of 10. Then the last bb bounced off the can and nailed me in the leg...stung like a bitch. I'll never use a gun again. But that doesn't matter...

What really matters is that nowhere in the constitution does it say that we are allowed to bear our own individual arms. The second ammendment just allows for the forming of militias and the stockpiling of firearms. Dammit, you people need to read it before you praise it.

One thing else, why the hell do you need a gun for self defence? How many times have you actualy needed to defend yourself? Sure, it MAY happen sometime in your life, but a fucking nuclear warhead MAY land right on top of you in the next five minutes.

Speaking of nukes, I'd like to build a time machine and take it back to five minutes before the inventor of those damned things got his 'brilliant idea' and kick him in the nuts. TAKE THAT MR. DEATH-DESTROYER-OF-WORLDS!

I shot a gun once. It was a bb gun, but a gun nonetheless. I was shooting pop cans off a fence. I hit about 6 out of 10. Then the last bb bounced off the can and nailed me in the leg...stung like a bitch. I'll never use a gun again. But that doesn't matter...

That is your problem.

What really matters is that nowhere in the constitution does it say that we are allowed to bear our own individual arms. The second ammendment just allows for the forming of militias and the stockpiling of firearms. Dammit, you people need to read it before you praise it.

Umm... it says it right where it says 'people' in the 'right of the people to keep and bear Arms' part. PEOPLE.

Oh yeah... much of today's debate regarding the individual's right to keep and bear arms, has been shrouded by misapplying various interpretations of the militia clause of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. The proponents of gun control insist that the second amendment only apply to an organized militia such as the National Guard. However they overlook the fact the National Guard in times of national crises, comes under direct control of the Federal Government. The Guard works in concert with the regular Army in carrying out the Federal military mission. This was finally put to rest when in the 1980s, then Minnesota Governor Rudy Perpich sued the Federal Government over control of the National Guard. The State of Minnesota lost the case and the Federal Government won.

The act of federalizing the National Guard is due to the law passed by Congress on January 21, 1903. It provides that the "..organized militia known as the National Guard of the state, Territory or District of Columbia.. " is under the command of the Nation's Chief Executive. Furthermore, all arms are controlled by and owned by the Federal Government.

If indeed the National Guard can be placed under Federal Control, then who is the unorganized militia? This question is rooted in historical precedence with ample evidence provided by the ancients, and contemporary thinkers that we are. That is to say, all able-bodied men (and now perhaps women) between the ages of 17 and 45 who are capable of acting in defense of the country. This definition also exits in the current United States Code [10 U.S.C. 311 (a)] which states:

"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age, and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age . . . "

The US Code further divides the militia into two classes: The organized, and the unorganized militia. The organized militia is viewed in the USC as the National Guard and Naval Militia, and the unorganized militia that consists of ".. all members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia." [10 U.S.C. 311 (c)]

Advocates of gun control not only ignore the definition of militia as that of the citizen soldier, they also ignore that the final clause that uses the verbiage of the "..right of the people..", is the same application of the "the people as used in the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments.

The application of the First Amendment applies to an individual's right to free speech. The Fourth Amendment secures the individual against unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. If the Second Amendment were to be construed as a collective right, then it logically follows that only corporations or collective bodies (such as political parties) would have a right to free speech, and would be free from unreasonable search and seizures.

Yet these Amendments have repeatedly been interpreted to be individual rights due to the clause that refers to 'the people'. The people refer to the individuals that make up the general populace.

A supreme court ruling finished your argument several years ago. People means people... you and me. I have read it... in great detail... HAVE YOU?!?!?

One thing else, why the hell do you need a gun for self defence? How many times have you actualy needed to defend yourself? Sure, it MAY happen sometime in your life, but a fucking nuclear warhead MAY land right on top of you in the next five minutes.

That is not a logical argument against gun ownership. I have defended myself with a gun three times in my life against criminals who were armed. Once involved actually shooting someone and I was found well in my rights of self-defense as the perpetrator was armed with a sawed off shotgun attempting to rob my dad's jewelry store in broad daylight with customers in it. He regrettably died as a result of his injuries caused by my having unloaded a magazine into his chest. Was it a happy day? HELL NO. But I am here because I exercised my right to bear arms.

I might be struck in the back of the head and killed by a falling meteor at any moment but my .45 saved mine and the other customer's lives that afternoon.

Speaking of nukes, I'd like to build a time machine and take it back to five minutes before the inventor of those damned things got his 'brilliant idea' and kick him in the nuts. TAKE THAT MR. DEATH-DESTROYER-OF-WORLDS!

I agree. But losing 5,000,000 men in a Japanese ground invasion wasn't much of a choice either.

Psst! Hey Ben! danarchist is a communist, it doesn't make much of a difference to him what the Constitution says.

I shot a gun once. It was a bb gun, but a gun nonetheless. I was shooting pop cans off a fence. I hit about 6 out of 10. Then the last bb bounced off the can and nailed me in the leg...stung like a bitch. I'll never use a gun again.

This is why you 1) should shoot into a large hill so that any stray rounds or missed rounds wind up in a big large sand hill and not your leg 2) try not to shoot at things with flat, angled surfaces (rocks) or rounded ones, especially with rounded projectiles.

My dad, when he was a young man-lad, had a handgun in his holster once. The safety was off. He and his buddy were at a shooting range taking shots at targets (downrange mind you, NO NOT AT OTHER PEOPLE). They had ear protection on. In one manner or another (I don't recall it exactly), my dad's .45 discharged into his right thigh. He didn't know it happened FOR THREE DAYS. He didn't know that it was his gun because of ear protection and the guy next to him shooting. He just didn't realize it. Yes, it was stupid to not have the safety on, and yes, he was probably stupid to not even realize he was shot. Stupid or really tough. ;) :D

Eventually he figured it out and doctors fixed him up and got the bullet out. However, after getting shot in the leg, did he tuck his tail between his legs and hide? No, he and I are still doing all the things LAW ABIDING RESPONSIBLE PEACEFUL GUN OWNERS do (I say it that way so I cannot be lynched by you gun controllers). There's my story.

[quote]That is not a logical argument against gun ownership. I have defended myself with a gun three times in my life against criminals who were armed. Once involved actually shooting someone and I was found well in my rights of self-defense as the perpetrator was armed with a sawed off shotgun attempting to rob my dad's jewelry store in broad daylight with customers in it. He regrettably died as a result of his injuries caused by my having unloaded a magazine into his chest. Was it a happy day? HELL NO. But I am here because I exercised my right to bear arms.[/qoute]
Wow, I don't even know anyone who was held at gunpoint (except my Mom, but she was working in a bank at the time), but you've 'needed' the protection of a gun thrice? Hmmm...seems like either you live in a bad neighbourhood or trouble comes to find you. I might go so far as saying you are an exceptional case.

Speaking of nukes, I'd like to build a time machine and take it back to five minutes before the inventor of those damned things got his 'brilliant idea' and kick him in the nuts. TAKE THAT MR. DEATH-DESTROYER-OF-WORLDS!

I agree. But losing 5,000,000 men in a Japanese ground invasion wasn't much of a choice either.

Actualy, that number was very overblown. What was preventing them from making another D-Day style invasion? Okay, maybe it would have been difficult to phyche the Japanese out into having them put defences on another beach, since there is limited coastline and its hard to pull off the same trick twice, but we COULD have bombed the hell out of some point along their coast (like we had been doing the entire war), and send a ton of troops in after it.

Plus, I don't think it was very fair or kind to drop a second nuke (killing thousands and thousands more), just because the Japanese weren't deciding to surrender as quickly as the US wanted them to.

The United States’ current position gun policy is extremely inefficient and counter-productive in reducing crime. It is deleterious to the state of the union. The proponents of gun control always cite crime and the fact that they want to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people as reason for more gun control. The effect of gun control is quite contrary to the popular belief. A criminal has no intentions of following the law and will not take the legal route of obtaining a firearm. This goes to show that gun control is actually disarming the victim it was intended to protect.

Gun control has racist beginnings. The original purpose of gun control in the United States was to protect the Klan from their victims. Had their victims been armed they would have made fools out of the KKK. You would have seen far less lynching and more dead Klansmen. The Third Reich also made gun control famous. In WW2 Germany it was unlawful for anyone who was not doing so for the benefit of the state to own firearms. How many armed Jewish dissenters would have been shipped away to Auschwitz? Had the Jews been armed far fewer of them would be shot and buried in mass graves in Europe.

Time-series data collected by Prof John Lott Jr. seems to indicate that states with more lenient gun control laws that support concealed carry have some of the lowest crime rates in the union. For example California has been passing a long series of gun control acts since the 80’s. This has had practically no impact on violent crime. Violent crime is still increasing in California even with the addition of all these new gun control acts. Since Florida’s passing of a non-discretionary concealed-carry law there have been large differences in the arrest rates for certain crimes. Violent crime is down 4%, murder 10%, rape 8%, aggravated assault –4%. The arrest rates for crimes of robbery, property crime, auto theft, burglary, and larceny are all up. This is due to the fact that the criminals are resorting to different methods of crime because the others are no longer safe.

The second amendment is possibly one of the most hotly debated issues in modern politics. However it is quite obvious of it’s intent. The second Amendment guarantees and individual’s right to bear arms. It is often dismissed as only applying to the National Guard. What sense does that make? The bill of rights was ratified in 1791 and the National Guard was created around 1916-1917. If a person believes that the 2nd is the only right in 10 that applies to the state then perhaps the 1st amendment applies only to the government as well. The second amendment refers to a well regulated but unorganized militia. Thomas Jefferson said it the best in 1781 in his Notes on the State of Virginia, Query IX: "Every able-bodied freeman, between the ages of 16 and 50 is enrolled in the militia. .... In every county is a county lieutenant, who commands the whole militia of his county. .... The governor is the head of the military, as well as the civil power. The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with the arms usual in the regular service.". The second amendment was put in place to prevent tyranny in government, it isn’t about gun control, it is about “control”.

Criminals have no intent on following the law in the first place, if they desire a gun they will get one. Perhaps this is where the phrase “when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” is derived from. It is quite evident that firearms serve as a deterrent to crime. The United States Government should change its policy on gun control; gun control has proven itself inefficient time and again. Just recently the 5th Circuit court has ruled that 2nd amendment does apply to individuals and is not just a collective right.

The USA is along with a few countries in the middle east the only country in the world that promotes guns, death penalty, etc. Europe, the UN, etc are against it. And don't say your american way is what matters. And don't argue that I'm a terrorist because I said something anti-USA.

Fredrik, none of us are calling you a terrorist. we are simply calling you an idiot, and i am calling you a communist.
Before you say anything against the US, or its ways, why dont you think about what your pitiful little life would be like if the USA were not here.

Now if you would like to talk about all the new laws that have been enacted in a feeble atempt to slowly disarm the US popluation... there is a topic worth discussing.

Argue all you want with it, but the 2nd Amendment was designed with the intention that a popluation armed with the same or similar weapons the military issues will never be controled. Not by outside forces nor government tyranny.

In the USA, the amount of murders commited per capita is WAY higher than in any country of the world where you're not allowed to have a gun

this one always makes me laugh. If you want to look at the numbers, there were more citizens killed by thier own government in "gun control" countrys in the 20th century then all other forms of "murder" combined.

I dont argue that we dont have too many murders... but at least i can sit in my house and not worry about someone breaking in the front door to rob me (or worse) in my own home. In England you are 10 times more likely to be a victim of such a home invasion type robery. Feel free to pretend this is not directly related to the fact that about half the homes in the US are defended with fire arms.

I shot a gun once. It was a bb gun, but a gun nonetheless. I was shooting pop cans off a fence. I hit about 6 out of 10. Then the last bb bounced off the can and nailed me in the leg...stung like a bitch. I'll never use a gun again. But that doesn't matter...

A bb gun is a toy. you hurt yourself with a toy, and now you are anti-gun? I once had my cousin run over my toe with his big wheel, but did that stop me from getting my drivers license and learning how to drive?

There is no reason to own a gun. The military needs guns to fight their battles. The police POSSIBLY need guns, though they could do just fine with a billy club and a tazer. The government could rent out guns for wildlife poulation control squads (which civilians could sign up for), so the deer and such can be downed easily. Otherwise, there is absolutely no right. Guns wander into the hands of kids, druggie, and idiots too often for us to let just anybody own them. Its sad that in this country, 2 15 year olds can order several large guns and come to school, killing 20 people.

what is your nickname???? danarchist? how does someone that can spell the word anarchist be so stupid? This is obviously not what your friends call you. I would suggest you change your name to "pansyassdan" or "itakeitinthedan". Oh... and if you are so "anti-gun" why dont you go get a big banner supporting GUN CONTROL, stand it on your lawn and see how long it takes for someone to come rob you in your house while you cower in your bedroom with the doors locked waiting for about half an hour while the local doughnut eaters get around to showing up. Have you ever had to call 911 in an emergency? I have. It took the cops only 10 minutes (this was quite fast) for them to show up. By that time the 15 or so idiots that showed up to kidnap one of the sluts at our party were all long gone, one with a broken leg, many with small puncture wounds from a nice heavy iron rake, others with long cuts from a snow shovel. One of my 4 friends broke his hand hitting someone, and i got hit with a lead pipe a couple times... having been outnumbered 3 to 1 i would rather have just shot one of them and watched the rest flee while waiting for the piggies.

Gun registration only leads to gun control. Gun control only leads to more crime, mostly by ones own government.

the supreme court has ruled that it is not the police's responsibility to protect you.

Before you say anything against the US, or its ways, why dont you think about what your pitiful little life would be like if the USA were not here.

slo5oh = retard

The Congress finds the following:

(1) Police cannot protect, and are not legally liable for failing to protect, individual citizens, as evidenced by the following:

(A) The courts have consistently ruled that the police do not have an obligation to protect individuals, only the public in general. For example, in Warren v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981), the court stated: `[C]ourts have without exception concluded that when a municipality or other governmental entity undertakes to furnish police services, it assumes a duty only to the public at large and not to individual members of the community.'.

(B) Former Florida Attorney General Jim Smith told Florida legislators that police responded to only 200,000 of 700,000 calls for help to Dade County authorities.

(C) The United States Department of Justice found that, in 1989, there were 168,881 crimes of violence for which police had not responded within 1 hour.

(D) Currently, there are about 150,000 police officers on duty at any one time.

(2) Citizens frequently must use firearms to defend themselves, as evidenced by the following:

(A) Every year, more than 2,400,000 people in the United States use a gun to defend themselves against criminals--or more than 6,500 people a day. This means that, each year, firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.

(B) Of the 2,400,000 self-defense cases, more than 192,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.

(C) Of the 2,400,000 times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, 92 percent merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8 percent of the time, does a citizen kill or wound his or her attacker.

(3) Law-abiding citizens, seeking only to provide for their families' defense, are routinely prosecuted for brandishing or using a firearm in self- defense. For example:

(A) In 1986, Don Bennett of Oak Park, Illinois, was shot at by 2 men who had just stolen $1,200 in cash and jewelry from his suburban Chicago service station. The police arrested Bennett for violating Oak Park's handgun ban. The police never caught the actual criminals.

(B) Ronald Biggs, a resident of Goldsboro, North Carolina, was arrested for shooting an intruder in 1990. Four men broke into Biggs' residence one night, ransacked the home and then assaulted him with a baseball bat. When Biggs attempted to escape through the back door, the group chased him and Biggs turned and shot one of the assailants in the stomach. Biggs was arrested and charged with assault with a deadly weapon--a felony. His assailants were charged with misdemeanors.

(C) Don Campbell of Port Huron, Michigan, was arrested, jailed, and criminally charged after he shot a criminal assailant in 1991. The thief had broken into Campbell's store and attacked him. The prosecutor plea-bargained with the assailant and planned to use him to testify against Campbell for felonious use of a firearm. Only after intense community pressure did the prosecutor finally drop the charges.

(4) The courts have granted immunity from prosecution to police officers who use firearms in the line of duty. Similarly, law-abiding citizens who use firearms to protect themselves, their families, and their homes against violent felons should not be subject to lawsuits by the violent felons who sought to victimize them.

Before you say anything against the US, or its ways, why dont you think about what your pitiful little life would be like if the USA were not here.

slo5oh = retard

ouch... my feelings are hurt. do you also live in one of the pitiful little countrys that germany "stepped on" with little or no resistance?

dont forget.... it was the US, that won that war and stopped Hitler from OWNING all of Europe.

pitiful little countrys

retard

it was the US, that won that war

retard

I live in Canada, BTW, but that doesn't make you less of a retard.

Await my reply. It's going to be long, later tonight after I get off work.

Some of you guys are fucking morons.

You're probably Christians, too. Idiots.

Oh c'mon kittie, don't be so fucking mean. =(

As for you guys from AR15.com... I've already been told about my recognition on your forum and I would like to make a post or two there to clarify a few things. I'm awaiting my registration email although I probably won't post there again after today.

Thanks for the kind words, fellas, and good luck trying to talk sense into some people around here. There are a lot of good thinkers but some people here are just total fucktards and refuse to ever think about a subject again... they have their opinion and nothing short of a car wreck will ever change it.

Oh c'mon kittie, don't be so fucking mean. =(

As for you guys from AR15.com... I've already been told about my recognition on your forum and I would like to make a post or two there to clarify a few things. I'm awaiting my registration email although I probably won't post there again after today.

Thanks for the kind words, fellas, and good luck trying to talk sense into some people around here. There are a lot of good thinkers but some people here are just total fucktards and refuse to ever think about a subject again... they have their opinion and nothing short of a car wreck will ever change it.

Our pleasure.... I don't know why some of the guys troll sites like these, but nevertheless we are pretty activist about trying to educate the general public about safe gun ownership. We tend to raid Ms. Magazine site among others. The lesbians over there can't stand us. Some of our guys are pretty wicked conservative and even I get worried about them. But, surprisingly most of them are yuppies or retired vets who really enjoy target shooting for a hobby. I am a GenX programmer and tend to enjoy getting some gun oil on my hands after a long week of coding. It's a release that no joystick could ever give me.

No we are not all a bunch of conspiracy Christian militia goofs either. We have dubbed those guys 'tinfoil hats'. They get rightsized pretty quick over there. Heck, we even had a thread get locked this past week because some guy was advocating shooting cats. UGH!

If any of you guys here on the Doom board are interested in shooting come on over. AR15.com is a great place to learn about the worlds greatest firearm ever produced and the zany crew is actually quite amusing.

Heck, we even had a thread get locked this past week

Heh, your moderators must be starving for fresh posts to destroy if that's considered surprising action :P

pitiful little countrys

retard

it was the US, that won that war

retard

I live in Canada, BTW, but that doesn't make you less of a retard.

you live in canada and call me a retard? aren't all canadians retarded, inbread, US draft dodgers?

retard? cant you think of anything better?
hell... call me a puss bucket, cum guzzler... i personally like "scab". It's short and to the point. Describes you quite well. A dirty, crusty, ball of dried up blood stuck to something bigger than yourself.

If you want to argue, feel free. If you think you can prove me wrong, do that. If you want to call me names... unless you are a "retard" i am sure you can think of more names to call me.

I'm happy to continue throwing insults back and forth... but if you want to show how retarded i am, why don't you stick to the subject of "gun control" and prove me wrong?

Can we please try to keep the volume of retarded posts in this thread to a minimum? Any more personal insults/name calling will be trashed.

I can kill anyone with any object. Just name it. Guns are for cowards that don't know how to kill people the hard way. But the real problem is that Americans are complete idiots.

I say that from an American standpoint, for everyday I step outside or turn on the television, I see millions of idiots. I can't believe how stupid these people can get. Only 1 out of every 500 Americans has enough brainpower to even know right from wrong. And you know who's fault it is? The governments! Gadammit I'm tired now...,dddd,d;rui

Guns have three uses.

1. Shooting small furry animals.
2. Recreation and target shooting.
3. Keeping the Queen of England out of your face.

If you're "antigun" then you need a serious history lesson. Try to think beyond the narrow scope of your own experience.

A society of armed citizens influences and destabilizes the government enough to insure they act for the good of the people. And should the need arise the people can overthrow an oppressive and criminal government.

Sure, banning all guns wouldn't really affect us now. But when your great grand children are helpless against jack booted government thugs you'll be rolling in your gave that you set the precedent for them to be helpless.

The rest of your comments are so humorous they aren't worth commenting on.

John

you live in canada and call me a retard? aren't all canadians retarded, inbread, US draft dodgers?

[snip the part that doesn't make sense]

If you want to argue, feel free. If you think you can prove me wrong, do that.

I'm not sure I can prove you wrong (on the subject of gun control I even agree with you), but I can prove you a dumbass.

I have called you a retard. This, yes, was an open insult. But still nothing to worry about - I don't think it's a crime to call someone a retard, especially here on Doomworld.

But in the reply, you just said that all Canadians are retards. This is quite a generalization - and also a very lame reply to an insult. Did I ever said anything bad about the Americans? No, because I'm not a racist. I know something about you from your four posts - enough, in my opinion, to call you a retard. But you don't know anything about "all Canadians", and never will because there're simply too many of them...

You didn't even take time to read my post properly - I said I live in Canada, I never said I'm Canadian (I'm not). There, you wasted a fine insult. :/

If you want to reply - please do it in private. Fnord.

You didn't even take time to read my post properly - I said I live in Canada, I never said I'm Canadian (I'm not). There, you wasted a fine insult. :/

If you want to reply - please do it in private. Fnord.

ok... so you are not a canadian... you didnt by any chance move to canada when your letter was called?

i would be happy to continue this offline. But you have a fake e-mail address attached to your user name on this forum, and i dont care enough to track you down.

That's why the forums have a private messaging system.

Await my reply. It's going to be long, later tonight after I get off work.

Some of you guys are fucking morons.

You're probably Christians, too. Idiots.

I am still waiting...

Await my reply. It's going to be long, later tonight after I get off work.

Some of you guys are fucking morons.

You're probably Christians, too. Idiots.

I am still waiting...

and waiting.....

I'm not a christian.

just a message to various newbies...
don't come here and give us all an example of verbal diarrhoea, then never come back. This is Doomworld, for Doom, and this is just a part-time forum for the regular people to let off steam in, not for certain people to spend all their fucking time in standing up for the gun culture which kills so many kids in your country each year. If you're serious about this stuff, go to a proper place to air you're opinions, not that anyone cares anyway, because no one will respect someone who's posted less than ten times, no one knows, and gives everyone else a hiding.
Get the message?

I was too tired to post that night, and then after that I forgot about this thead. I don't care enough to post anymore.

just a message to various newbies...
don't come here and give us all an example of verbal diarrhoea, then never come back. This is Doomworld, for Doom, and this is just a part-time forum for the regular people to let off steam in, not for certain people to spend all their fucking time in standing up for the gun culture which kills so many kids in your country each year. If you're serious about this stuff, go to a proper place to air you're opinions, not that anyone cares anyway, because no one will respect someone who's posted less than ten times, no one knows, and gives everyone else a hiding.
Get the message?

Blah blah blah... sounds like it's time to call the homies at C.A.N.G. for an internet driveby