| 73Q Music Videos | Vote On Clips | Submit | Login   |

Reddit Digg Stumble Facebook
Desc:
Category:Classic TV Clips, Accidents & Explosions
Tags:india, fighting, sword
Submitted:FreeOJ
Date:06/07/14
Views:1286
Rating:
View Ratings
Register to vote for this video

People Who Liked This Video Also Liked:
TFL Bill says something about healthcare and Hitler
Bronies on Springer
Cincinnati Mall / Forest Fair Mall - The Last Breath
Heavy Metal Church
The Main Thing
Asbo Zaprudder the Magic Baby Seal
A Gentleman's Wager
Power Injection off my Baby Jesus
Go For The Glow
The Enchanted Pot
Comment count is 22
Riskbreaker
Worst musou game ever
Maru
it didn't freeze even once. this is way better than dw8.

dowstroyer666
0:30 Purple hat old dude disarmed
Rangoon
How Sikh-ening.
Jet Bin Fever
I sikh what you did there.

memedumpster
Just had to throw another pun jab, didn't you?

oddeye
THIS IS WHY EVERYONE NEEDS TO CARRY A LOADED GUN AT ALL TIMES!!!

That aside, don't Sikhs carry religious daggers and shit?
EvilHomer
No, this is why people need to overstep the constitution and ban assault swords. Otherwise, you and everyone you know will be murdered.

And yes, they carry daggers, it's one of their religious commandments. The whole outfit - the hair, the bracelets, the underpants - is part of a centuries old spiritual tradition. And they know how to use those fucking daggers, too. Don't mess with a Sikh; they will cut you wide open!

ashtar.
You know, it does say "bear arms," but doesn't specifically mention firearms. There's all sorts of laws about swords and maces and shit that are probably unconstitutional. I'm going to have to start open-carrying a Dacian falx to protect my rights to have absolutely any weapon that I can think of absolutely anywhere.

cognitivedissonance
When all the Sikhs have swords, only Sikhs will have swords.

Nominal
Taking the 2nd amendment at face value would mean total unrestricted private ownership of weapons. A well regulated modern militia would include all sorts of anti tank weapons and surface to air missiles.

But those things aren't legal to privately own because that would be fucking retarded.

Also retarded is the idea that it was put in there to safeguard against tyranny. Pure tea party minute man LARP fantasy horseshit.

The original constitution also stipulated against universal suffrage. Progress sometimes means changing it.

oddeye
No way dudes, the constitution is the result God dialing the founding father's brains and hitting re-fax on the stone tablet Moses broke coming down the mountain.

IT CAN NOT BE CHANGED, NOW OR EVER, IT SAYS SO IN THE CONSTITUTION!!!

EvilHomer
Progress sometimes means changing things, but change does not always mean progress. The Constitution also stipulates that people have a right to free speech, a right to worship as they see fit, a right to fair trials. Should we get rid of these things? The Constitution is a living document, change is progress; when we reduce the issue to this tangential abstraction, doesn't sound so bad, right?

If you're going to change things, change things in such a way that the people in power have more checks on their behavior, and the masses have more control over their own lives. You can't go about it the other way round; removing checks on the powerful and placing ever more restrictions on the weak and humble is not a progressive act; it's regressive, it's quite literally turning back the dials of history.



Anyway, I'm a little shocked you guys seem to be suggesting what you seem to be suggesting. Well, maybe not oddeye, but you, Mr Nominal! You're usually fairly levelheaded and non-inflammatory. I think it's fair to say that no serious progessive politician is proposing to repeal the Second Amendment; that is simply a straw-man placed in the mouths of the anti-gun crowd by teaparty pundits on Fox News. Anti-gun lobbyists, in truth, focus on somewhat reasonable goals like reinstating the Federal ban on assault weapons (a pointless effort, as I've argued before). They do not want to take EVERY gun. They do not want to turn every gun owner into an imprisonable criminal.

But maybe you do?

I've often wondered what, precisely, the individual, Fourth Estate anti-gun believers think "gun control" would look like. This is really the centerpiece of the whole argument; it is much alluded to, and yet its exact nature is rarely spelled out. We *already have* gun control laws, on both a state and a federal level. We have waiting periods, we have registration laws, we have background checks, training classes, restrictions on felon gun ownership, and a whole host of small regulations, like making it illegal to manufacture a shotgun with a barrel under a certain length. Hell, as you yourself point out, we even have near-total restrictions on the ownership of military-grade weapons systems. That's a lot of gun control. So what more do you, specifically, want to see?

SixDigitDebt
Revenge of the Sikh
ashtar.
hehe

Rodents of Unusual Size
Don't these guys know?

Don't they know?


Swords...


WILL FUCKING CUT YOU WIDE OPEN
Jet Bin Fever
THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT. THEY'LL CUT A BABY IN HALF.

fedex
these guys are about as good at swordfighting as I am at dragracing manta rays

oddeye
Yeah? Well, Batman used to suck a lot of dicks.

Basenote, treble-clef... Burn this square!

Whatever

spikestoyiu
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a sword is a good guy with a sword.
oddeye
There is no bad and good, only swords and the bad or good guys that love them.

SixDigitDebt
Refer you to the scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark on that count, sir.

Register or login To Post a Comment







Video content copyright the respective clip/station owners please see hosting site for more information.
Privacy Statement