"Don't Fuck With Me" a song

49 posts / 0 new
Last post
mykcob4's picture
"Don't Fuck With Me" a song

If your neck is red
Move along
If you skinned your head
Move along
They don’t give you the right to fuck with me
If you say I’m lost
Move along
If you bear a cross
Move along
They don’t give you the right to fuck with me

I don’t have to bow to you
I don’t care what you do
Nothing gives you the right to fuck with me

If you call my friends fags
Move along
If you need a gun
Move along
They don’t give you the right to fuck with me

I don’t care who you are
I don’t care how much money you have
Nothing gives you the right to fuck with me

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

Harry33Truman's picture
I need a gun, but I m not

I need a gun, but I m not fuckin with you with it, so what's it to you?

mykcob4's picture
You don't need a gun, Harry.

You don't need a gun, Harry.

Harry33Truman's picture
Yes I do, what if someone

Yes I do, what if someone tries to break into my house? It happened before myckob, this world is full of crazy ass motherfuckers-

mykcob4's picture
Don't make this an NRA debate

Don't make this an NRA debate thread. harry. I could prove that you don't need a gun but that is best suited for another thread.

Harry33Truman's picture
OK myckob, but it has no

OK myckob, but it has no bearing on you. Unless you break into my house or try to murder me in the parking lot, my gun will remain out of your sight and have no effect on your life. So again, what's it to you?

LogicFTW's picture
I find it quite humourous you

I find it quite humourous you think that you owning a gun will save you, if someone ambushed you with intent to murder you, one random day in the parking lot. Especially if the person intent on murdering you has a gun as well. Any idiot with an hour of training with a gun can murder someone quite easily given the advantage of surprise.

I want to be clear: I am not saying I have any intent of any harm towards you myself, I do not want to see you murdered, even though we disagree on a few things.

LogicFTW's picture
You must live in a scary

You must live in a scary place Harry Truman, I am glad I do not live where you do.

Harry33Truman's picture
Southern California

Southern California

jamiebgood1's picture
I live in Southern California

I live in Southern California and there is no way Id bring a gun into East La or any place that seemed dangerous. Id have mace and maybe a taser if I was scared. They are working on finger print tech for guns so only registered users can fire it. I love that idea because a high percentage of legal guns are stolen and used by criminals.

LogicFTW's picture
They already have gun tech

They already have gun tech like this, as well as guns that require an accompanying wristband/watch in order to fire. The NRA got so uptight over this, they eviscerated a random gun shop owner that listed the first one for sale in his shop. NRA did everything they could to slow/stop this technology even though the technology is already available.

Guns in the hands of untrained professionals is a scary thought. We see how often the "professionals" police, military, etc. screw up decisions when they have a gun.

After the theater shooting that happened in Colorado a couple years back, I was a bit nervous to go to a movie theater for a little while. Not because I was worried about the extremely rare event of another James Holmes shooting the place up, but because of all the gun wackos with nervous/itchy trigger fingers, in a dark, crowded, loud movie theater re-creating the OK Corral if a kid popped a balloon. Fortunately that did not happen, (mainly because theaters for good reason ban guns on their premises, and they stepped up surveillance looking for guns.)

One of the most common things stolen in a home is guns. Criminals frequently admit to targeting homes that have guns, they are highly valuable and easy to fence, or they keep it for themselves a valuable tool in their chosen career.. The career criminal just waits until they know you left the house.

jamiebgood1's picture
LogicForTW

LogicForTW
Great info didn't know they had figured it out. Now I hate the NRA even more. Thanks for that:)
I agree on theaters. Also shopping malls and any public place now is susceptible to mass murder. Gun rights have taken away the rights of people to congregate without the fear. Now mentally ill can purchase a gun. Thats logical;)

Harry33Truman's picture
Then you can not bring a gun

Then you can not bring a gun there- and I will, problem solved.

LogicFTW's picture
Yay, Harry Truman will save

Yay, Harry Truman will save us! With his mighty...uh... gun. So glad Harry will step up and take on this heavy burden to protect us all!

Wait... don't we have trained professionals that we already pay for, that do that? They seem to always be around in large crowded places, wonder why that is? Especially when we got heroes like Harry Truman around! Nevermind the fact he has had zero training!

chimp3's picture
No offense mykcob4 , but your

No offense mykcob4 , but your Richards needs a Jagger!

mykcob4's picture
No offense taken.

No offense taken.

chimp3's picture
Good because I have written a

Good because I have written a few songs and my McCartney needs to find his Lennon.

jamiebgood1's picture
Mykcob4

Mykcob4
I sense you've been fucked with before by some of these interesting folks. I think it would great if you sang that song with a twang on your front porch just to relate your message to all these characters that fucked with you. It does bring up emotions of anger and hate and prejudice. I know from what I've learned about you that you would embrace the beauty in people too.
Can your 2 nd verse be about all the kinds of people you want to fuck with you?

Side note: Id love you to start a thread to expose the NRA. Its insanity how people feel safer with guns that are created to kill when the statistics show such different results. A trained cop's 3 year old killed himself a couple months ago with his daddy's gun. I also hate guns.

mykcob4's picture
The people in the song never

The people in the song never fucked with me personally. I just don't like bullies. The thing that they have in common is that they are all bullies.

Harry33Truman's picture
You can hate guns, you have

You can hate guns, you have that right- no one said you had you own one. More people die annually of obesity than from gun violence, also I hate McDonalds, yet I don't try to ban it.

mykcob4's picture
Maybe you should Harry, maybe

Maybe you should Harry, maybe you should.

Harry33Truman's picture
Tru to ban McDonald's?

Tru to ban McDonald's?

SecularSonOfABiscuitEater's picture
Sarcasm is a hell of a thing

Sarcasm is a hell of a thing ain't it?

SecularSonOfABiscuitEater's picture
Sarcasm is a hell of a thing

Sarcasm is a hell of a thing ain't it?

LogicFTW's picture
Allright, I am gonna jump in,

Allright, I am gonna jump in, this has already turned into a gun debate.

How far do you want to take these gun rights Harry Truman?

Say in 10 years from now a gun is invented, where all I have to do is feed the gun computer a picture of someone I dislike, and the gun has a smart bullet, that will track down said person from over 2 miles away and splatter their brains, no matter where they hide.Then the bullet disintegrates in a way that leaves no evidence behind. It is very expensive, but if I have enough money I have the power with this gun to wipe someone out, with no possibility of getting caught. Are you okay with that gun? Do you want to live in a world where that is a possibility? Just anyone with enough funds to just borrow a gun like that can end anyone with no skill, no repercussions? What about a person with criminal history? How about someone that has a history of serious mental illness?

No? Why not? Where do you draw the line? Why there?

Let me remind you, back when the 2nd amendment was written, 1791. The most advanced "gun" at that time would probably have been the Kentucky long rifle, capable of firing two or three .60 balls per minute out to an accurate range of 300. This gun cost more than most homes did at the time, was useful only in the hands of expertly trained person, (usually by the military,) frequently jammed, and was rarely instantly fatal unless shot at close to point blank range.

Now we have legal guns that have silencers, laser sights, large magazine capacities, and so simple to use a 10 year old can be an effective killing machine with less than 1 hour of training on the gun.

Harry33Truman's picture
Now you're just fear

Now you're just fear mongering.

Furthermore, when the First Ammendment was passed the most advanced form of communication was a primitive printing press. Today, we have the internet. Does this convince you that we should repeal the First Amendment? Of course not, as a matter of fact that was just about as convincing to you as your gun statement was to me.

LogicFTW's picture
Heh, a gun rights activist

Heh, a gun rights activist saying my hypothetical future scenario is fear mongering. *chuckle*
I am guessing you did not even read my whole post.

Nice way to sidestep the entire argument, accuse me of fear mongering. I guess this means you do not have a response to the scenario I presented.

As for 1st amendment to my 2nd amendment, what a horrible analogy. Two completely separate issues, besides no one here is saying we should repeal the first amendment. I was not even saying repeal the 2nd amendment. You jumped to that conclusion. I asked you some questions about a hypothetical scenario and you respond with calling me a fear mongerer instead of answering the questions.

Why? Does that question make you uncomfortable? Do you feel your rationale for everyone having complete gun rights slipping? Why the seemingly angry response and attack on my character?

I am happy to have a civil conversation, despite you calling me a fear mongerer I am not upset, I am used to these sort of responses. Do know that if you continue to just do ad hominem attacks on me, and post analogies that make no sense instead of responding to my questions I will assume you do not have an answer you are willing to admit to, for my initial questions to you.

Harry33Truman's picture
The question you asked me is

The question you asked me is just absurd, it will never happen, but if it did, we would resolve that if and when it happens. Its like if the Chinese made it so anyone who watched news became a serial rapist- such a hypothetical scenario does not invalidate the arguments for freedom of the press.

LogicFTW's picture
http://gizmodo.com/that-aim

http://gizmodo.com/that-aim-assisted-rifle-is-now-accurate-up-to-a-mile-...

That article is over 2 years old, what do you think another 10 years will bring? How about another 100?
Is my question still absurd? You can predict the future of gun technology? Woah you can make billions with that knowledge enlighten me with your genius understanding of the future of gun technology.

And you just stated, "we will resolve that when it happens" so you are hoping people will draw a line and say this gun but not this gun. This rule but not this rule. This person gets to say what the rules are but not that person. Why is gun x okay but gun y is not? Why X person but not Y person or Z person.

Its like if the Chinese made it so anyone who watched news became a serial rapist- such a hypothetical scenario does not invalidate the arguments for freedom of the press.

Took me a few re-reads to make sense of what you are trying to say there. I assume you are trying to say:
"The Chinese may one day invent a special mind control trick they can insert into a news broadcast, that: makes everyone that watched the news at that time a serial rapist. That this hypothetical scenario does not mean we need to suddenly go about changing the first amendment."

I agree, you clearly are not reading what I say. I already said that: I did not mention anywhere changing the 2nd amendment. I simply asked you in that scenario where you draw the line on what type of guns any civilian would have access too. If you want to include the 2nd amendment repeal argument fine, we can go there. A slightly different argument, but you are bounding off into another conversation without answering all my initial questions, you are changing the subject slightly in effort to say my question is ridiculous. Sounds to me like you are still avoiding the initial questions for whatever reason. Which is fine, like I said before, I assume you do not have an answer to those questions that even you are satisfied with.

You did at least sort of answer the initial question, now answer the rest.

Harry33Truman's picture
Now you're just fear

Now you're just fear mongering.

Furthermore, when the First Ammendment was passed the most advanced form of communication was a primitive printing press. Today, we have the internet. Does this convince you that we should repeal the First Amendment? Of course not, as a matter of fact that was just about as convincing to you as your gun statement was to me.

algebe's picture
@Harry Truman: "More people

@Harry Truman: "More people die annually of obesity than from gun violence, also I hate McDonalds"

I was just thinking the other day about Trump's offer to sit down with Kim Il Blimp of North Korea for a chat over hamburgers. Instead of whacky CIA schemes to kill him, like they tried with Castro, they should just send him a freight plane full of Big Macs and Happy Meals. He'd eat himself to death in six months.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.