💬 Off-Topic Phil and weapons/military/self-defence general - Gun/military/self-defence talk that relates to Phil but isn't tied to a single update

[Adamska]

Phil will lie his ass of about getting one. We will continue to see through his lies. Phil will get butthurt that we don't believe he's armed and fabulous, so he will bounce and squeak his way down to the local surplus/sporting goods store and buy a slightly real looking airsoft gun. He will paint the orange barrel tip black and take photos to show us. Those of us who can tell a real firearm from airsoft will point it out. We'll all laugh at Phil. Phil will get even more pissy and in a fit of tard rage and sexual frustration Phil will stick the airsoft pistol's barrel up is has and furiously masturbate. The end.

gunned down by police after threatening them with an airsoft pistol during another ibuproverdose.

If it wasn't for Phil being a coward, this would be a reasonable series of events.

 

[Rabbit Bones]

Phil buys a Desert Eagle .50 and the recoil breaks his wrists. Whoever is attacking him kicks him in the balls, and Phil dies in a gutter.

All because he had to have a gun.

 

[Don't Call Anybody]

He'll shoot himself in the foot.

Pretty sure his aim isn't that good.

 

[Clown Doll]

Phil thinks that Australatina can do flyovers with military jets in California over matters as trivial as the bathroom issue. Clearly anything that his imaginary country does in it's foreign policy is wish fulfillment, like Chris beating up his "trolls" in Soul Calibur.

 

[Hyperion]

Phil thinks that Australatina can do flyovers with military jets in California over matters as trivial as the bathroom issue. Clearly anything that his imaginary country does in it's foreign policy is wish fulfillment, like Chris beating up his "trolls" in Soul Calibur.

I hope jets from Autismstan really do.

Spoiler

[/spoilers]

I like how the video ends with Goose crashing

 

[Hyperion]

The joke is that theF14 was an interceptor

Its engines strapped to weapons

 

[The Dude]

The joke is that theF14 was an interceptor

Its engines strapped to weapons

Sadly we don't have them anymore. The Navy phased out the Tom Cat in, I think, 2006. The only fighter the US Navy uses right now is the F/A-18 E/F/G Super Hornet. They're a good jet, and more than capable, but the F-14 Tom Cat was just so much better.

Any Autismlandia planes in US airspace would be swiftly dealt with. Our guys wouldn't even have to waste missiles on them. They'd use BFM (Basic Fighter Maneuvers) and shoot them down with guns before the Autismlandia pilots had time to bounce and squeak.

 

[Ravenor]

Caliente Gonzales the Spicy Trandito.

@BOLDYSPICY! You know what you need to do.

Fuck California. What a bunch of paranoid, pantie-waisted, nambypamby pussies. Of all the stupid shit to be afraid of. I'm sure all those ridiculous laws are saving so many lives in one of the most dangerous states in the country.

To be fair I don't see a good reason for a Civilian to own one, they are banned in the UK and in most of the EU because they found favor with people like Drug Dealers, Football Hooligans, and other criminal elements, and sadly there where a few deaths caused by people owning them and using them improperly.

Hell the Police are told under no circumstances are they to be allowed to be used above the neck if they do and the person survives they can get slapped with a attempted murder charge (I think there are one or two exceptions for this but they are very few an far between).

 

[The Dude]

@BOLDYSPICY! You know what you need to do.



To be fair I don't see a good reason for a Civilian to own one, they are banned in the UK and in most of the EU because they found favor with people like Drug Dealers, Football Hooligans, and other criminal elements, and sadly there where a few deaths caused by people owning them and using them improperly.

Hell the Police are told under no circumstances are they to be allowed to be used above the neck if they do and the person survives they can get slapped with a attempted murder charge (I think there are one or two exceptions for this but they are very few an far between).

This isn't the UK. It isn't the EU. This is America and we have guaranteed rights, including the right to defend ourselves, and we have no obligation to change our laws because other countries do things differently. There are people who are not comfortable carrying a firearm and should be allowed alternatives that would suit them better. Pepper spray doesn't work on everyone. Tasers aren't as effective on some people as they are on others. Not only that, but criminals don't care about laws. The only people being limited by laws are law abiding citizens.

 

[Ravenor]

This isn't the UK. It isn't the EU. This is America and we have guaranteed rights, including the right to defend ourselves, and we have no obligation to change our laws because other countries do things differently. There are people who are not comfortable carrying a firearm and should be allowed alternatives that would suit them better. Pepper spray doesn't work on everyone. Tasers aren't as effective on some people as they are on others. Not only that, but criminals don't care about laws. The only people being limited by laws are law abiding citizens.

Sorry I wasn't arguing a political point, what I was trying to do was explain the reasoning ownership of expandable batons is banned in some jurisdictions using examples and reasoning I am most familiar with, that it seems the sate of California agrees with in some areas.

I think there is a bit of a point we have both missed, in our respective posts.

 

[The Dude]

Sorry I wasn't arguing a political point, what I was trying to do was explain the reasoning ownership of expandable batons is banned in some jurisdictions using examples and reasoning I am most familiar with, that it seems the sate of California agrees with in some areas.

I think there is a bit of a point we have both missed, in our respective posts.

My point was that it's stupid to make laws outlawing something responsible for so few deaths when things like kitchen knives, hammers, baseball bats, screwdrivers and wrenches are used far more often in assaults and homicides. Most of the US thinks California's laws are ridiculous and paranoid, and ultimately ineffective since they are one of the leaders when it comes to murder rates.

As far as Phil goes, I'd much rather have him packing batons and pepper spray instead of blades, firearms and tasers. He's much less likely to harm himself or others with "less-leathal" weaponry like that.

However, since California does have a ridiculous law against carrying collapsible batons, I will not be opposed to basking in the schadenfreude of someone ratting to the police that he is in possession of such a weapon or if he gets stop-and-frisked by a passing cop who thinks something is suspicious about Our Pet Potato.

 

[x.eight.six.systems]

Sorry I wasn't arguing a political point, what I was trying to do was explain the reasoning ownership of expandable batons is banned in some jurisdictions using examples and reasoning I am most familiar with, that it seems the sate of California agrees with in some areas.

I think there is a bit of a point we have both missed, in our respective posts.

Last time I've checked those laws law would be useless because criminals don't follow the law.

 

[Ravenor]

My point was that it's stupid to make laws outlawing something responsible for so few deaths when things like kitchen knives, hammers, baseball bats, screwdrivers and wrenches are used far more often in assaults and homicides. Most of the US thinks California's laws are ridiculous and paranoid, and ultimately ineffective since they are one of the leaders when it comes to murder rates.

An you make a valid point, those have killed more people than a baton, however the primary purpose of those items is as a tool and not a weapon but baton's primary and only function is as a weapon.

I do agree with you that CA's weapons laws seem like a joke (from the outside admittedly) considering how easy it would be to drive across state lines with a weapon from a state with more lax laws, and I do agree that the ones in other places the UK are broken because criminals by their definition don't obey the law but we also tend to have less violent crime than the US and different law enforcement styles.

Having things like this banned or restricted aid's in the prosecution of criminals, and to make the acquisition of said weapons harder.

As far as Phil goes, I'd much rather have him packing batons and pepper spray instead of blades, firearms and tasers. He's much less likely to harm himself or others with "less-leathal" weaponry like that.

Yet another valid point one I have expressed my self in the past, I don't want Phil to have any weapons because he's liable to get himself into trouble, hurt himself (something I'd find ridiculously funny) or tard out an harm some one with or at least try to, and this is the option I'm most worried about.

However, since California does have a ridiculous law against carrying collapsible batons, I will not be opposed to basking in the schadenfreude of someone ratting to the police that he is in possession of such a weapon or if he gets stop-and-frisked by a passing cop who thinks something is suspicious about Our Pet Potato.

I think a close brush with the law would be what it takes for him to stop carrying weapons altogether, but when he ignores our advice and does land in hot water it will probably be the best for him.

Do you happen to know what the punishment would happen to be if he was caught like this?

 

[The Dude]

I think a close brush with the law would be what it takes for him to stop carrying weapons altogether, but when he ignores our advice and does land in hot water it will probably be the best for him.

Do you happen to know what the punishment would happen to be if he was caught like this?

Depends on if it is a Felony, Misdemeanor, and whether or not the judge decides to go easy on Phil for being retarded.

California is known for being fairly "bleeding heart" for the most part, but they do try to be fairly tough on crime because they have some of the highest crime rates in the land. So he could very well likely get a judge who sees Phil as an ultimately harmless feeb and slaps him on the wrist. They may feel that he is not supervised enough and orders him to have some sort of more involved case worker to monitor his actions more closely. This may also get him put into a supervised group home, something that would be very beneficial to Phil.

On the flipside he could also get a judge who is tired of people walking away with little punishment because they are merely soft in the head. A judge that feels that just because Phil is mentally a child shouldn't mean he shouldn't be charged as an adult for adult crimes. This judge may decided to make an example of Phil and give him the maximum sentence for his crime. Since Phil's crime is carrying prohibited weapons concealed on his person, something that California is fairly strict on, he could easily see himself faced with a stiff monetary fine and/or seeing several months to a couple of years in county lockup.

 

[AnOminous]

However, since California does have a ridiculous law against carrying collapsible batons, I will not be opposed to basking in the schadenfreude of someone ratting to the police that he is in possession of such a weapon or if he gets stop-and-frisked by a passing cop who thinks something is suspicious about Our Pet Potato.

Singling out California is a bit silly. Whether it otherwise has (probably) unconstitutional gun laws, it is one of 18 states (including Texas) and the District of Columbia where illegally carrying clubs is a crime and these expandable batons are among the weapons prohibited.

It's not like there aren't plenty of completely legal things to carry that can be used as a bludgeon anyway. With a Maglite you can blind someone and then smash them over the head, so it's all good.

The relevance to this thread is Phil can be locked up for this shit.

Do you happen to know what the punishment would happen to be if he was caught like this?

Possession looks like a misdemeanor up to a year but things like carrying it concealed or actually tarding out and brandishing it at someone would be additional charges. Probably the lowest grade of felony unless he actually attacked someone.

 

[The Dude]

Singling out California is a bit silly. Whether it otherwise has (probably) unconstitutional gun laws, it is one of 18 states (including Texas) and the District of Columbia where illegally carrying clubs is a crime and these expandable batons are among the weapons prohibited.

It's not like there aren't plenty of completely legal things to carry that can be used as a bludgeon anyway. With a Maglite you can blind someone and then smash them over the head, so it's all good.

The relevance to this thread is Phil can be locked up for this shit.



Possession looks like a misdemeanor up to a year but things like carrying it concealed or actually tarding out and brandishing it at someone would be additional charges. Probably the lowest grade of felony unless he actually attacked someone.

I know California isn't the only US state with stupid laws. I wasn't singling them out because of a personal grudge, I was commenting on their laws because Phil is frequently bouncing and squeaking himself all over the state.

 

[DykesDykesChina]

On another note, given his edgelord mentality I'm genuinely surprised he's never tried to depict himself as some sort of knife-fighter/assassin. We know he's made a post or two threatening people or groups with being stabbed, but he's never put any energy into making himself out to be some sort of tranny blademaster.

 

[Ruin]

God damn. The Diamond Dogs really had to lower their standards.

 

[DykesDykesChina]

God damn. The Diamond Dogs really had to lower their standards.

He's cosplaying a Spetsnaz soldier.

 

[Ruin]

He's cosplaying a Spetsnaz soldier.

More like Spaznaz amiright?