my subscriptions
POPULAR-ALL-RANDOM | LOADING...MORE »
stretch85 commented on a post in r/triangle
c64person 3 points

I mean, people do have marches against climate change...

No one is asking to take guns away, they just want to prevent these things from happening.

stretch85 5 points

No one is asking to take guns away

Respectfully, lots of people are asking for precisely that.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/GunDealsAnnouncements
Subliminal87 63 points

Let’s make this shit happen. Today.

I’d donate to the cost of getting it set up.

If I had any knowledge of how to build a website or where people found these deals at I’d try it.

Fuck these commies. “Let’s have open internet....actually, it’s only open if it fits our agenda, here, you go buy drugs here, dirty panties here, you could probably buy cum on this sub reddit, freshly squeezed from spez himself”.

People wonder why the right or left hate each other lately. Gee, I fucking wonder why.

stretch85 12 points

I'm onboard, but let's think this through. First, what approach is best? I see three options:

  1. Partner with an existing site like gun.deals and extend it to function like a subreddit. IMO this is unlikely to be successful.
  2. Spin up an instance of an open source Reddit clone. This is perfectly doable and can be done quick, but it's not quite what we want. We don't need a plathora of "subreddits," just the one, and we want it to cater to a very specific function (e.g. not having to use spolier tags and custom CSS to mark deals as sold out).
  3. Build a new site which very closely resembles everything /r/gundeals was, adapted to our specific use case. Obviously this requires a substantial amount of effort, but A) we can leverage an existing web framework and related packages to minimize development time, and B) we're not solving a problem, just replicating pre-existing functionality.

Assuming we go with option 3, we need a few things:

  1. Some developers. I've got plenty of experience building sites on the Django Python framework, so if I can find a few folks to help out, I'll volunteer to head the project.
  2. A place to host the code. GitHub has free public repositories, and I don't see any need to keep the code private.
  3. A place to host the site. No worries, I've got this part covered.
  4. Community involvement. We can get a new site built pretty quickly, but we'll need people to help test it and most importantly begin contributing content as soon as it's ready. We don't want to lose the momentum we have right now. And it would fantastic if we could entice some of the original mods to help out with content curation.

Thoughts?

AcidStorage 2 points

You da real MVP

stretch85 2 points

Nah, the guy who made the bot is. I can't recall who it was unfortunately.

Load more comments
stretch85 commented on a post in r/triangle
stretch85 28 points

Gun owner here, with kids who will be entering the school system soon. While we agree on many points, I wanted to offer my thoughts to hopefully provide some context from "the other side."

For no clear reason, we've allowed a loophole to persist that doesn't require assault rifles to go through the same background check that we require of pistols.

This is not a loophole. Most states don't require a handgun purchase permit in addition to the normal process of purchasing a firearm. The only reason North Carolina does is that a law was passed during the Jim Crow era with the express intention of allowing racist county sheriffs to deny minorities the right to acquire pistols.

Also, "assault weapon" is an invented term intending to invoke fear and paint firearms in a negative light. As far as school shootings are concerned, an AR15-platform rifle is no more or less deadly than a handgun. The statistics of past shootings show no correlation between the types of firearms used the casualty rate. If you want to get gun owners on board, please drop this nonsense.

We should have universal background checks for all assault rifles - whether purchased at gun shows or gun stores.

This alludes to the mythical "gun show loophole." Every purchase from a licensed dealer (FFL), at a gun show or elsewhere, must include a NICS background check as mandated by federal law. Private sales can occur between individuals without a background check, but this has nothing to do with where the sale takes place. Implementing universal background checks (requiring a NICS check for private sales as well) is a valid proposition, but don't confuse it as having anything to do with gun shows.

It will require compromise

Most of the talk around "compromise" is really about concessions by gun owners, who get nothing in return. What does this bill offer in exchange for the new restrictions being proposed?

JeffJacksonNC 6 points

I just put up a second edit where I try to respond to several of the more frequent concerns people have raised. It includes some of yours.

stretch85 7 points

Thank you very much for your consideration, sir. I truly appreciate it. And you've certainly earned my respect for reaching out to your constituents directly, especially on such a devisive topic.

Load more comments
stretch85 commented on a post in r/gunpolitics
stretch85 123 points

She immediately changes to the founding fathers could have never been able to predict the guns we have now.

"It's absurd to suggest that dozens of people educated enough to draft the entire system of government for a new nation would not assume that firearms technology would continue advancing as it had over the previous centuries."

HingelMcCringelBarry 7 points

I'm pro gun too but it's also absurd to think they knew what they'd be like now. Like when cell phones came out they kept getting smaller. Everyone assumed that they'd end up being tiny or you could just put your hand up to your ear. Well instead now they are getting bigger and now they are full computers. And that was a span of maybe 15 years? Some things are just impossible to predict. I'm sure they figured firearm technology would advance, but I doubt they had any idea about how far. They used a pen and paper to write letters to each other. Did they know that someday they'd be able to digitally send them instantaneously anywhere in the world? No. People have been thinking about the future for a long time as flying cars. Maybe it will happen. Maybe it won't. But a lot of things will change in the future that we just can't even comprehend right now. Stick up for our rights, but please do it in an intelligent way, otherwise it makes us look stupid. Of course the founding fathers expected firearm technology to advance, but to what level do you actually think? They envisioned A-10 warthogs? No. They probably figured guns would get smaller and faster to load. But I don't think they ever imagined a modern firearm.

My point is this shouldn't be a point because it's nonsense. It's nearly impossible to predict where technology will be in 5 years from now, let alone hundreds. Don't use it as a point to defend 2A.

stretch85 13 points

The framers correctly assumed that firearms technology would continue to improve, yet made no effort to limit the amendment to firearms in use at the time. People who argue against the second amendment like to frame this as an oversight rather than an intentional decision. Being unable to predict the future, the framers used intentionally vague wording intending that it would be interpreted by future courts. That's how we ended up with the numerous restrictions we have on firearms today, despite the existence of the second amendment.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/gunpolitics
throwittomebro -3 points

Or a military base.

edit: Well except for this one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort_Hood_shooting

stretch85 10 points

People other than military police are generally prohibited from carrying firearms on a military base under normal circumstances. When I was enlisted, I couldn't even store firearms in my dorm.

throwittomebro -4 points

I mean it just doesn't look good for the "good guy with a gun" theory. There's not a MP somewhere on base with an M-16? I find that hard to believe. This and the Sutherland shooting were pretty damning IMO.

stretch85 3 points

The wiki article suggests Fort Hood (or at least that area of the base) uses a civilian police force. I can't comment on that having never been there.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/liberalgunowners
Alconium 0 points

Ignorance is an excuse here unfortunately. They'll fail to charge her because she didn't have constructive intent. She's not building an sbr. She's destroying a rifle.

Wish they would throw her stupid ass in jail tho.

stretch85 2 points

If her intent was to destroy the firearm, why did she cut through the barrel instead of the receiver?

stretch85 commented on a post in r/Firearms
jsled -5 points

Cool, so it should be easy to answer. In what way is the technical distinction between semi- and fully-auto distinction relevant most pro-gun-control arguments?

stretch85 12 points

Is this a serious question?

The purchase of new automatic firearms has been outlawed since 1986. Arguing gun control with someone who doesn't know that is like arguing abortion with someone who doesn't know what a trimester is.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/gunpolitics
stretch85 8 points

Critics of high-capacity magazines have said the gun jamming is a reason to ban large magazines because a jam would have stopped the shooting if the gunman had used long rounds of ammunition where he did not have to reload. The Parkland shooter used only smaller magazines, however.

What?

stretch85 commented on a post in r/explainlikeimfive
SonOfSparda304 2,456 points

Every day I drive past a house that has several good sized hives in their backyard.

Didn't realize what they were until I slowed down a couple days ago to look. They just look like weird file cabinets.

stretch85 119 points

They just look like weird file cabinets.

Everything is filed under B.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/Firearms
stretch85 53 points

In Florida, that wasn't enough for relatives, authorities or his schools to request a judicial order barring him from possessing guns.

This is because no one wants to get involved until it's too late, either due to potential liability, danger, or refusing to believe anything is wrong.

I support a legal mechanism for disarming dangerous people provided it requires a warrant and a high burden of proof is established.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/gunpolitics
bradyn_n 6 points

I wish she had some real facts. And there is no need of using kids to get a point across.

stretch85 3 points

There absolutely is a need to use kids. Imagine if it was a grown man up there delivering the same material. It wouldn't receive nearly as much attention, and it's content would be criticized much more readily. No one wants to be the asshole challenging a crying sixteen-year-old girl.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/liberalgunowners
stretch85 15 points

Excellent post.

What gets me more than anything are the calls for reinstatement of an assault weapons ban, following the notion that certain types of rifle are somehow more deadly. The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people using only two handguns and 10- and 15-round magazines. The type of weapon doesn't matter because the shooter is assured to encounter zero meaningful resistance within a gun-free zone until law enforcement arrives.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/NCGuns
stretch85 3 points

Long guns (rifles and shotguns) require a federal NICS background check conducted by the dealer like anywhere else. NC is unique in that a pistol purchase permit ($5) or concealed carry permit issued by the state is also required to purchase a handgun. Your county sheriff's department will have info on where and how to apply.

stretch85 commented on a post in r/RealEstate
stretch85 2 points

Does your builder's name start with several H's by chance? We're building in the Wake Forest area. Went under contract in early July with closing estimated in Jan/Feb. Now we're looking at late April. This worked out well for us though, since it has positioned us to sell our current home at a more favorable time of year.

view more:
next ›
13,319 Karma
3,253 Post Karma
10,066 Comment Karma

Following this user will show all the posts they make to their profile on your front page.

About stretch85

  • Reddit Birthday

    January 1, 2011

Other Interesting Profiles

    Want to make posts on your
    own profile?

    Sign up to test the Reddit post to profile beta.

    Sign up