Quantcast
Channel: humor – VolkStudio Blog
Viewing all 63 articles
Browse latest View live

Don’t dare Mad Mike — he would take you up!


Pole arms and hoplophobes

$
0
0

I wonder why the fans of Markley’s Law don’t annoy the Swiss guardsmen with their helberds or the Japanese history reenactors with spears and naginatas. Seems to me, the users of pole arms are far more appropriate targets for the accusations of compensating for insufficient potency than the users of small handguns.

Fun guns and the girls who shoot them

Poor Yorick and other skulls

$
0
0

“My dearest deer…”

“Drink up!”

She’s no mechanic!

$
0
0

She may have a grease gun, but the cars she serviced catch fire more than they run…

Pay Attention!

Hazards of modeling: the hungry beasts

$
0
0

So you are just standing in a meadow, trying to look properly angsty…and this big beast comes up and tries to nibble on you!

Bear cavalry is real!


This is not a scarf

Funny wabbit!

Hush, Daddy!

Guns, fidelity and genital size

$
0
0

Reading anti-gunner comments about guns being compensations for small genitals, I wonder if they realize the assertion is a compliment. In nature, species with relatively large genitals are engaged in sperm competition, generally stemming from non-monogamous mating habits. Developing large genitals isn’t free, biologically speaking. So, if the theory of guns being compensations for small penises is correct, it would also correlate gun use with more developed brains. Guns being a subset of “tools”, that’s not an unreasonable theory. Equating “small genitals” with weakness, which is the aim of the detractors, is a logical fallacy: gorillas are a typical example of a species with small penises and rather impressive muscle.

Looking closer at that theory, I wonder why “compensating” would be bad. The same overall political group thinks that gender reassignment surgery is a fine way to compensate for mismatched software and hardware — merely owning or carrying a firearm is a much less onerous compensation for not being a cave bear with big teeth and claws. Wearing clothes to compensate for lack of fur is ok, wearing glasses to compensate for poor eyesight is ok, why would wearing sidearms to compensate for lack of built-in weapons be somehow an exception?

Gun stand

You’ve read the order!

A prepper’s dilemma

$
0
0

After the tour of Federal Ammunition plant in Anoka, I am convinced that fewer rounds of good ammo beat more bulk milsurp. The QC process at Federal is rather more impressive than the lack thereof that’s evident from the results I get from Tula and similar brands.


This is not a scarf

Funny wabbit!

Hush, Daddy!

Guns, fidelity and genital size

$
0
0

Reading anti-gunner comments about guns being compensations for small genitals, I wonder if they realize the assertion is a compliment. In nature, species with relatively large genitals are engaged in sperm competition, generally stemming from non-monogamous mating habits. Developing large genitals isn’t free, biologically speaking. So, if the theory of guns being compensations for small penises is correct, it would also correlate gun use with more developed brains. Guns being a subset of “tools”, that’s not an unreasonable theory. Equating “small genitals” with weakness, which is the aim of the detractors, is a logical fallacy: gorillas are a typical example of a species with small penises and rather impressive muscle.

Looking closer at that theory, I wonder why “compensating” would be bad. The same overall political group thinks that gender reassignment surgery is a fine way to compensate for mismatched software and hardware — merely owning or carrying a firearm is a much less onerous compensation for not being a cave bear with big teeth and claws. Wearing clothes to compensate for lack of fur is ok, wearing glasses to compensate for poor eyesight is ok, why would wearing sidearms to compensate for lack of built-in weapons be somehow an exception?

Gun stand

Viewing all 63 articles
Browse latest View live