'2nd amendment must go' - Jay Mohr

eyer

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Posts
21,263
The actor and comedian is blaming the Boston bombing on "culture" rooted in the 2nd Amendment:

What bothers me most about today is that we’re getting used 2 it. ENOUGH. 2nd amendment must go. Violence has 2 stop. Culture MUST change.

— Jay Mohr (@jaymohr37) April 15, 2013

The 2nd Amendment lends itself to the CULTURE of violence we are living in. Stop blowing up my timeline w your gun/porn fetishes.

— Jay Mohr (@jaymohr37) April 15, 2013

It's sad the majority of progressives like Mohr decline to be likewise forthright...
 
Actually we need to return to the culture of violence. Honorable, manly violence that encourages and rewards courage and strength, not cowardice. There is honorable violence, such as having it out in a fair and honorable fist fight or duel, and cowardly violence which is attacking unarmed people. If a boy is taught honorable violence, that you confront an opponent and have the courage to fight with fists or even weapons, face to face, he will be less likely to develop perverse and craven murderous impulses later. Its the fact we've removed the culture of HONORABLE violence that is the root cause of cowardly criminal violence.
 
If a boy is taught honorable violence, that you confront an opponent and have the courage to fight with fists or even weapons, face to face, he will be less likely to develop perverse and craven murderous impulses later.

Very hard to believe.

Remember, all wartime atrocities are committed by soldiers. Soldiers are carefully schooled and indoctrinated in "honorable violence," but it is their also being trained in the techniques of violence that makes the difference.
 
I was trained to win. Ambush, grenade, drone, mine. You're in a fight, there is no fair.
 
He's a comedian. Who gives a fuck. It's the opinion of some random person.
 
Actually we need to return to the culture of violence. Honorable, manly violence that encourages and rewards courage and strength, not cowardice. There is honorable violence, such as having it out in a fair and honorable fist fight or duel, and cowardly violence which is attacking unarmed people. If a boy is taught honorable violence, that you confront an opponent and have the courage to fight with fists or even weapons, face to face, he will be less likely to develop perverse and craven murderous impulses later. Its the fact we've removed the culture of HONORABLE violence that is the root cause of cowardly criminal violence.
Blame the development of guns for all that. You can't duel with guns like you could duel with swords. There are no skill levels, training requirements or sporting rules when two people square off with guns. First shot to hit something wins, that's it.
 
Blame the development of guns for all that. You can't duel with guns like you could duel with swords. There are no skill levels, training requirements or sporting rules when two people square off with guns. First shot to hit something wins, that's it.


It's a fight to the death. Not a tickling contest.
 
Blame the development of guns for all that. You can't duel with guns like you could duel with swords. There are no skill levels, training requirements or sporting rules when two people square off with guns. First shot to hit something wins, that's it.

No. First one to run outta ammo loses. The secret to dueling is fire discipline.
 
So let a Democrat offer a Bill to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Its a simple process.
 
People fire wildly when theyre excited.

True enough. Not that it supports your idea of the winner is the guy who has ammo left since he's likely to be excited and not notice that until they are both in the same boat. Not like real people are likely keeping count of how many shots the other guy has used.
 
True enough. Not that it supports your idea of the winner is the guy who has ammo left since he's likely to be excited and not notice that until they are both in the same boat. Not like real people are likely keeping count of how many shots the other guy has used.

My 3rd great grandfather fought a duel back in 1836. His opponents first shot knocked him down and out cold. The opponent thought he was dead but the lead hit a belt buckle. Anyway! The opponent fired off his pistols in jubilation of his victory, did a gig, and then my guy woke up! with 4 loaded pistols.

No! He didn't kill the man. The guy stood there like a fool, my guy took careful aim, and put a nice hole in him in a reasonably safe place, prolly the man's ass.
 
Actually we need to return to the culture of violence. Honorable, manly violence that encourages and rewards courage and strength, not cowardice. There is honorable violence, such as having it out in a fair and honorable fist fight or duel, and cowardly violence which is attacking unarmed people. If a boy is taught honorable violence, that you confront an opponent and have the courage to fight with fists or even weapons, face to face, he will be less likely to develop perverse and craven murderous impulses later. Its the fact we've removed the culture of HONORABLE violence that is the root cause of cowardly criminal violence.

You're on the right track, but you're confusing symptoms and causes. The reasons for our increasingly post-violence culture are structural.
 
Blame the development of guns for all that. You can't duel with guns like you could duel with swords. There are no skill levels, training requirements or sporting rules when two people square off with guns. First shot to hit something wins, that's it.

Or else they both lose/die. I've read that some gunfights in the Old West ended that way. It is possible to be shot fatally, but not instantly-fatally, and still shoot back -- even possible not to realize you're wounded until several minutes later.

Or else they both miss. Then they both die, of embarrassment.
 
It looks like a gun duel broke out at the Denver pro-pot rally. At least one innocent bystander received a bullet.
 
Back
Top