# The downside of carrying a firearm...



## JimH52 (Jan 14, 2014)

Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com

It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop


----------



## Indofred (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



It is, your firearms laws are insane.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

We are just lucky to have guns keeping us safe


----------



## Redfish (Jan 14, 2014)

So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?

Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?


----------



## Redfish (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> We are just lucky to have guns keeping us safe



yes, we are.  Safe from the government.   And thats the exact reason for the 2nd amendment.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > We are just lucky to have guns keeping us safe
> ...



Very true.....

Our society is suffering from the Gubmint gunning down 13,000 Americans a year


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The 2nd amendment was about protecting Americans from redcoats and indians. Since neither is now a threat, the 2nd amendment is now obsolete.


----------



## martybegan (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



Then get it repealed. Until then go pound sand.


----------



## martybegan (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



So go ahead and propose retired police officers cannot keep thier ability to concealed carry.

That should go over well.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

martybegan said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Can't get it repealed, The NRA has the US by the balls and is squeezing much too hard.


----------



## editec (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?




Nutcase, huh?  

Odd that this "nut-case" managed to fake sanity so long and so well that he retired as a CAPTAIN in the Tampa police.



> Reeves retired in 1993 as a captain with the police department in nearby Tampa. He was also director of security at Busch Gardens until 2005, the station reported.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

Of course. Lord knows that as people age, they never are affected by mental illness! Once sane, always sane. I'd just wish someone told that to my grandma and two uncles.


----------



## chikenwing (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



Not in the least,go back to 7th grade American history class


----------



## Dutch (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



No but we have many safety regulations on said cars that have reduced deaths caused by accidents.  You have to pass a drivers test and complete comprehensive training to get a liscense.  Not the weekend "training course" you need in most states for your CC.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 14, 2014)

At this point it appears the retired LEO is in the wrong.  However, the other side of the story hasn't been heard.

It is possible that the person texting became belligerent and the retired LEO perceived his behavior as a threat.

We shall see.


----------



## chikenwing (Jan 14, 2014)

Dutch said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



Can't compare the two,not even close.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

Dutch said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



Only if you plan to drive on state roads. You dont need a license to buy and drive a car around your own property. The same as you should not need a background check on a firearm you plan to keep on your own property.

It's just that gun grabbers like to pre-emptively attack firearm owners because it's a platform position for the weak parasites. They love a gun grabber.


----------



## Dutch (Jan 14, 2014)

chikenwing said:


> Dutch said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



He compared them. Not I.


----------



## LeadRoundNose (Jan 14, 2014)

Finally got my concealed carry license yesterday.  It took over 3 months!  There must be a tremendous backlog in the State I live in.  People are breaking records for the purchase of guns here as well as the license to carry them.

Luckily, I live in a State that still believes in freedom.  One of the last bastions of rugged individualism.

If my State ever turns blue, then the game will be over for all.  We hold too many electoral votes, our population is too big for the effect to be limited to our State.  

If you value your 2nd amendment rights, support my State.

Support Texas.  Support freedom.  Support the Constitution.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



Saying it could have been anyone as a reason for policy is ridiculous.

And before you deny any alternative motive for posting this other than some gun control argument to ban concealed carry weapons let's cut to the chase.

Implying that everyone with a carry permit is a potential murderer and then using that false statement for a argument for gun control is the same as saying every driver is a potential drunk driver who will kill someone so we should suspend everyone's license.


----------



## 007 (Jan 14, 2014)

Indofred said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> ...



Try and take us over, Einstein.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop



Instead, an unarmed person relieved the nutter of his weapon.

Too bad it was AFTER a bad guy with a gun stopped a good guy with a phone. 



> Implying that everyone with a carry permit is a potential murderer and then using that false statement for a argument for gun control is the same as saying every driver is a potential drunk driver who will kill someone so we should suspend everyone's license.



I'll do more than "imply". I will state outright that anyone with a gun is a potential killer/murderer. Being ready and able to kill is the only reason to carry a gun. 

The silly ass comparison to cars is just nonsense because, among other reasons, we pass laws to mitigate the damages that can be done by cars and drunks. We also require that drivers have insurance or can prove they can pay for the damage they cause.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> ...



Adding a firearm to the equation turned what would have been a shoving and shouting match into a fatality


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Jan 14, 2014)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Dutch said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



Oh. 

I didn't realize the cop was in a theater located on his own property.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop
> ...



Most hand carry firearms do not have the stopping power to afford a carrier the license to kill. Most are for self defense, you ignorant shit stain on society. That said, most who carry a gun reserve the right TO DEFEND themselves, not kill someone else. But to a moron, there is no difference between the initiation of violence and defending oneself.

Because you can not fix stupid. You just can not.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > JimH52 said:
> ...



Yep. Up until the nutter pulled his gun, the worst damage was caused by thrown popcorn. Popcorn would not have made a three year old an orphan.

The nutters are defending in the indefensible.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 14, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop
> ...



Wrong on all counts since most gun owners will never shoot anyone. 



> The silly ass comparison to cars is just nonsense because, among other reasons, we pass laws to mitigate the damages that can be done by cars and drunks. We also require that drivers have insurance or can prove they can pay for the damage they cause.



There is nothing stopping anyone from getting behind the wheel of a car drunk or sober. In fact I will bet my left nut that there are more people on the road right this very second driving impaired than there are people with concealed carry permits in your town.  So who is the greater threat to your life?

And a gun owner convicted of wrongful death can be sued for all he is worth just like a drunk driver can.


----------



## 007 (Jan 14, 2014)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



The cop will now spend his remaining years in prison. All because he had to be "safe" by bringing a gun into a movie theater


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The real point is that guns are too far out of control in the US, and there are just too many around, to be able to do any real sort of gun control. The NRA has terrorized the populace so much for so long that there probably won't be any going back to a saner society where people don't feel the need to be packing.


----------



## 007 (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


And the problem is?


----------



## martybegan (Jan 14, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



So there is no level of violence between popcorn throwing and shooting? you forget a good old fashioned ass-kicking.


----------



## 007 (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...


Sorry, bubble head, but your COMMIE LEFTIST ANTI CONSTITUTION BULL SHIT isn't going to hold water here. It is the "POPULACE" by a VAST MAJORITY that WANT their second amendment RIGHT to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, and because of people like YOU, firearm sales in America jumped FORTY PERCENT last year.

It is you CONSTITUTION HATING, RADICAL, COMMIE LEFTARDS that think everyone should be disarmed that are the minority.

Fuck off, COMMIE.


----------



## NoNukes (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



One nut case???? This happens frequently. And the automobile argument is stupid, but what should we expect.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



i would be interested in hearing the full story 

for now it is one sided


----------



## Redfish (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...




wrong:

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson



The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.-Thomas Jefferson


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

007 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



Why would you advertise that you have guns to steal and your neighbor doesn't?

Bad guys like guns


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

This is tragic.

as a general remark and in no way justification for the shooting - people, get off your stupid cellphones, if you need to text - go outside, there are MANY people which get extremely irritated by somebody texting or calling or receiving the call in supposedly "no cell phone area".

Cell phone use in the restricted areas is a known trigger for somebody unstable.
It is just not worthy to get somebody off the rails becasue of the need to use the device.

I know it is your right. But sometimes it is just safer not to.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

_Can't get it repealed, The NRA has the US by the balls and is squeezing much too hard. _

Great. But you would have had to have some to start with.
Childish temper tantrums won't help. Sometimes the answer is "no".


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

martybegan said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Without a gun in the equation, this would have just been a shoving match with alot of profanities


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



You sound so certain. LOL. You do realize people get maimed and killed with bare hands, yeah? No, of course not. You're so full of your(shit)self that you believe what you say as though you have some authority on the matter.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



without a gun free zone, which this movie theatre WAS, the guy with a gun might have been more restrained to use his own, as the wife of the guy texting might have killed him as well. Or any other moviegoer. Or the killed guy himself.

He knew he was packing there ALONE.

A repeat of the Aurora situation all over again.

I can guarantee you that this psycho won't be that fast to get loose anywhere else where carry is not prohibited.

It's Florida. People know that anybody next to you can be packing.
And generally people are polite and self-restrained.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Shit yea
We could have had a shootout in the theater....that would have fixed things

A shithead with anger issues was packing and an innocent man lost his life


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

NoNukes said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



Driving a car is considered a privilege while keeping and bearing arms is a Constitutional right. What's hard to understand about that?


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Most probably we won't have even an altercation as the guy opposing the texting would be polite in asking to stop and the guy texting would either politely explain it 's a 3 yo he is texting and he will be done in a sec, or just go outside.

Your idiocy about the "shootout" is just an idiocy ecasue everywhere else except the stupid gun free zones people are packing but there are no shootouts.

except in the stupid gun free zones.

Get them out.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



Both are subject to legal constraints

Neither is absolute...What's so hard to understand about that?


----------



## hangover (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > We are just lucky to have guns keeping us safe
> ...


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Won't be long till this nut job is the next perp.


----------



## hangover (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



^^^^^^^^^^^^
Fake christian, trying to defend gun violence. Pft!


----------



## NoNukes (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Did I predict this?


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...



Some legal constraints, yes. But not to the point of infringement with arms. Not so cars.

*Never kick an old dog
He might have one bite left*
-----------------
Robert Heinlein


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



Reasonable infringement has alway been allowed. Felons can't buy guns. You can't buy a machine gun. You can't buy armor piercing bullets. You can't carry a gun onto an airplane


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



You can't paint just anyone that has a permit with the same brush as this idiot.

He was 71 and probably a tad feeble minded.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



Your ignorance is outstanding.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

LeadRoundNose said:


> Finally got my concealed carry license yesterday.  It took over 3 months!  There must be a tremendous backlog in the State I live in.  People are breaking records for the purchase of guns here as well as the license to carry them.
> 
> Luckily, I live in a State that still believes in freedom.  One of the last bastions of rugged individualism.
> 
> ...



2 to 3 months is pretty average and has been for the past few years. As a co-owner of a gun shop I can attest to the fact that more and more people are not only buying guns but filling up gun ranges and applying for CHL's. 

God Bless Texas!


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Actually you can buy armor piercing rounds, look up M855 (green tip).


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



Damned pesky militias


----------



## Pennywise (Jan 14, 2014)

The cop only did what millions of us would love to do but are not crazy enough. They should have stopped texting, I guess.

Look what happens when the entire population thinks they live in a bubble of narcissism. We should outlaw cell phones.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

As much as the gun nuts love to bring up cases where an armed citizen prevented a crime, they go into a frenzy when a case comes up where an armed citizen causes an unnecessary death that could have been avoided if firearms were not in the equation

We need a sensible discussion of firearms in this country. It is not always all good or all bad

There are many cases where having arms available saves lives. Prevent crimes and protect the innocent
There are also many cases in which an armed citizen uses it in  domestic violence, road rage or suicide

But we are not allowed to discuss the role of guns in our society....NRA has made sure of that


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Reasonable* regulation*; not i*infringement* which is expressly forbidden. And, except for felons buying guns, your examples are untrue.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Militia's or ok, those comma's drive liberals nuts though.

Thomas Jefferson spoke to the topic directly with his comment, 


No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Jeffersons justifications for his statement are found in comments like when the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty, and force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism.

Jefferson also wrote,


For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security. He expounded on his point when he stated the strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

John Adams was rather direct when he stated the following:


Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self-defense, and even more controversial and bold when he offered the right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.

Thomas Paine told us:


Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.

George Washington said:


The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference  they deserve a place of honor with all thats good. Then he seemingly justified his belief with the statement it will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it.

James Madison went right to the point of the current debate when he observed:


Americans have the right and advantage of being armed  unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. Then he made sure to warn us as to why the first statement is needed when he argued A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained in arms, is the best most natural defense of a free country. 

Samuel Adams told us:


The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.

Patrick Henry said:


Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. And to see the first statement not come true Henry said The great object is that every man be armed.


----------



## martybegan (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Well it looks like pounding sand is your only option then.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


Stop living in the past. Got a real reason that's valid for today's world?


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



It's as valid today as it was then.

Some would say even more so, today.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

martybegan said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



I wouldn't live in a gun crazy country, so please keep shooting each other if that's what you all prefer. I was just trying to help by adding some common sense to the debate. Obviously, you prefer more dead people than less, which makes you possibly insane. Please see a mental health specialist.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

Defiant1 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



So you need your guns to fight the US army?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Do you live in the US?

If not, then why the fuck do you even care?

If so, then when are you leaving?


----------



## Dot Com (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> We are just lucky to have guns keeping us safe


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Cool, another noob who prefers more dead people than less.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

As gun ownership increases, gun related violent crime decreases. FACT.

But to morons, there is no good way to deal with it except to ban all firearms and make sure only those who authorize themselves and others, may have one. Typical hypocrites.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Cool another idiot that who can't comprehend what's written.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop



More likely, if everyone in the theater had been armed, they would have all eneded up shooting each other.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

Vandalshandle said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop
> ...



Totally. Then S. Stallone and the rest of the incredibles come through the emergency door with full auto artillery M240s and begin spraying down the massive shoot out.


----------



## chikenwing (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Cool another hysterical nonsense machine.


----------



## dannyboys (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...


Now days the "indians" are in their teens and drive brand new Escalades and carry stolen hand guns and like to play the 'knock-out' game and wear ball caps sideways with two foot long peaks and have gold 'grilles' and wear their pants like they have 'loaded' them and have to run in packs because individually they are cowards and after all that's what their ancestors did in the jungle and they can only get like 12 year old simians who don't know what the word 'today' means to impregnate and of course the odd pure White 'snow bunny' if they have enough money to buy one.
That's why the second amendment is important.


----------



## KGB (Jan 14, 2014)

Dutch said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



except that driving is a privilege granted by the state, whereby the right to bear arms is enumerated.


----------



## KGB (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Supreme Court affirms fundamental right to bear arms....no militia required....

Supreme Court affirms fundamental right to bear arms


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > JimH52 said:
> ...



No the idiot who pulled the gun did that.  The gun itself is irrelevant. The guy was off his leash period.  For all we know if he didn't have the gun he would have beaten kicked or stabbed the other idiot to death.  If that was the case this post would never have been started.


----------



## dannyboys (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...


Wake up pal. Do you really believe some simians would attempt to steal the dudes guns? They are genetically programed to be cowards. That's why they do everything in packs.
"Let's see. Do we try to break into the dudes house who is clearly stating he has some fire power and will use it or do we walk into the LIB-pussy's house next door and bang his wife and girls and walk off with their electronics?"


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> As much as the gun nuts love to bring up cases where an armed citizen prevented a crime, they go into a frenzy when a case comes up where an armed citizen causes an unnecessary death that could have been avoided if firearms were not in the equation
> 
> We need a sensible discussion of firearms in this country. It is not always all good or all bad
> 
> ...



* they go into a frenzy when a case comes up where an armed citizen causes an unnecessary death that could have been avoided if firearms were not in the equatio*

the retired cop was in the wrong 

the theater is a gun free zone 

on the other hand 

*guns saves lives*

The shooting happened just before 9 p.m. Saturday, when the gunman walked into the Mystic Gentlemans Club at Southeast Stark Street and Southeast 99th Avenue and opened fire, said Sgt. Pete Simpson with Portland police.
The shooter hit three people, prompting a person in the bar to return fire, hitting and critically injuring the suspect.

Strip club shooter denied entry, returned with mask, gun | kgw.com Portland


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > As much as the gun nuts love to bring up cases where an armed citizen prevented a crime, they go into a frenzy when a case comes up where an armed citizen causes an unnecessary death that could have been avoided if firearms were not in the equation
> ...



What made this theater a gun free zone?

In Florida which I believe this occurred movie theaters are not gun free zones.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



-- But you can aim a gun at it and blow it away, right?

I love living in a society so creative that its solution to everything is just to blow it up.


----------



## TooTall (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



I find it hard to believe that an organization with a mere 5 million members has the power to squeeze very hard.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

007 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



Holy shit-- get a _*grip *_dood.

He said nothing about the Second Amendment (or communism, or leftism or the Constitution, or 'banning' anything); in fact he noted that "gun control" laws would be ineffective.  He referred to a terrorized packing public that "feels the need".  That's a statement about attitude, not laws.  And it's a worthy one.

Try listening to what somebody's _*saying *_before jumping into attack mode, huh?  A meltdown like that doesn't exactly bolster your position, yanno?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



You must love living in fantasy land.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 14, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > As much as the gun nuts love to bring up cases where an armed citizen prevented a crime, they go into a frenzy when a case comes up where an armed citizen causes an unnecessary death that could have been avoided if firearms were not in the equation
> ...



Where does it say the theater was a gun free zone?


----------



## dannyboys (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...


Given the fact that you have zero understanding of what living in America is like maybe you ought to keep your idiotic opinions to yourself.
Or maybe you'd like to also give us your opinion of how you would deal with the mafia in Moscow....without ever setting foot in the fucking place?
 You're a LIB-pussy waste of bandwidth.
 BTW genius the only people who habitually kill each other with stolen hand guns every day in every inner city in the country are the simians. The law abiding people who own legal guns do so partly to deter the simians. And it works.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



I need my guns to prevent anyone from taking my liberty, without just cause.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



You truly are an idiot. 

You let gun control advocates hook you, making gun owners look ridiculous, thus reinforcing their advocacy of more regulations.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



So now, "guns don't kill people" and "people don't kill people" --- no, in fact it's gun-free zone *signs *that kill people.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 14, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





On the theaters' website is a list of prohibited items and actions. Among them: No cell phone use, including texting, in the theater auditorium. And no weapons allowed.

Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

dannyboys said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Another emotional meltdown that can't read.  Some of y'all are like a freaking baby getting his pacifier taken away.  Somebody makes a simple observation, attack his mental health and tell 'em to shut up.

Which is ironic if you consider the Amendment that comes right before the Second one.  I don't think you could grok the idea of the Constitution if you ate the document and shat it out.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 14, 2014)

What percentage of LEGAL gun owners ever shoot anyone?

Can anyone tell me that?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 14, 2014)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Dutch said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



And yet another idiot chimes in to help further erode our Second Amendment rights.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



The website list about firearms carries no legal authority. You may be asked to leave but no crime is committed. 

Signs mean absolutely nothing in Florida. 
 As long as it is not a place that is on the NO CARRY list...

 Places off-limits when carrying:

 1. any place of nuisance as defined in s. 823.05
 2. any police, sheriff, or highway patrol station
 3. any detention facility, prison, or jail; any courthouse
 4. any courtroom*
 5. any polling place
 6. any meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or special district
 7. any meeting of the Legislature or a committee thereof
 8. any school, college, or professional athletic event not related to firearms
 9. any school administration building
 10. any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption*
 11. any elementary or secondary school facility
 12. any area technical center
 13. any college or university facility*
 14. inside the passenger terminal and sterile area of any airport*
 15. any place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> As much as the gun nuts love to bring up cases where an armed citizen prevented a crime, they go into a frenzy when a case comes up where an armed citizen causes an unnecessary death that could have been avoided if firearms were not in the equation
> 
> We need a sensible discussion of firearms in this country. It is not always all good or all bad







rightwinger said:


> There are many cases where having arms available saves lives. Prevent crimes and protect the innocent
> There are also many cases in which an armed citizen uses it in  domestic violence, road rage or suicide
> 
> But we are not allowed to discuss the role of guns in our society....NRA has made sure of that



And should anyone try, we can count on multiple posters to jump up, insult them and tell them to shut up and get the fuck out.  QED.

Nothing has changed; it's the same thing I was saying a year ago when I got to this site:
Bob Costas must be "fired"...
Pierce Morgan must be "deported" ...
David Gregory must be "arrested" ...

See the pattern.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 14, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



who said it was a crime 

not me 

however the theater as far as the owners are concerned 

consider it a gun free zone 

most folks would honor their wishes or go elsewhere 

i would honor their wishes by going elsewhere


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



It's exactly the kind of hissyfit I get when I do the same thing.  Dare to suggest an attitude adjustment is in order and get blitzed with attitude.

Baby with a pacifier.  No difference.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> What percentage of LEGAL gun owners ever shoot anyone?
> 
> Can anyone tell me that?



I'm not sure, but I suspect that the number of people who die from bullet wounds that were shot by guns is around 100%....


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> The cop will now spend his remaining years in prison. All because he had to be "safe" by bringing a gun into a movie theater



So, you've already convicted him without hearing his side of the story?  Then, what's the point of discussing things?


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

dannyboys said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



I still don't trust them....they are still Indians

All they are interested in is stealing our white women and scalping the menfolk

That is why we need our guns


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The cop will now spend his remaining years in prison. All because he had to be "safe" by bringing a gun into a movie theater
> ...



Actually, yes I have


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 14, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The cop will now spend his remaining years in prison. All because he had to be "safe" by bringing a gun into a movie theater
> ...



it is too early to tell the out come of this incident


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

dannyboys said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...



Wake up pal

Do you really think your guns can shoot themselves?  Do you really think criminals are afraid of a sign? Do you really think a criminal cannot figure out if you are home or not?

Go ahead advertise that you have guns. A criminal wants to steal your guns more than he wants to steal my 50 in HDTV


----------



## Slacker (Jan 14, 2014)

martybegan said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



And don't forget that it was at a kids hockey game that a parent got mad at another parent and punched him and killed him. So much for they theory that only guns can kill.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Slacker said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



There have been many fights between parents at kids sports contests. They usually end in a bloody nose and some big time embarassed kids
We can be sure that if guns were involved they would have ended in deaths


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Slacker said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



That was a woman actually.

The idea is not, and never has been, that "only" guns can kill.  It's that (a) they make it so much easier, and (b) they're hawked continually by the testosterone-drowning NRA mentality to a culture already bent on violence.  Guess where that combination leads.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



gun ownership is not connected to formation of militia.
Formation of the latter one should not be infringed as bearing arms should not be infringed.

TWO rights in ONE Amendment


----------



## TemplarKormac (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



My father was diagnosed has having the predisposition of a psychopath. Not only did he serve in Grenada and The Gulf War, he is a law abiding gun owner and NRA member. He's also a trained marksman. I mean he could have gone DC sniper on the entire neighborhood but he never did. He could have at any time turned his guns on me, my brother, his wife or my grandmother. To say that this culture is "bent on violence" is a misnomer. Criminals are "bent on violence" not law abiding gun owners (with the exception of a few very extenuating circumstances).


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



It's more than obvious you have no balls.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> As much as the gun nuts love to bring up cases where an armed citizen prevented a crime, they go into a frenzy when a case comes up where an armed citizen causes an unnecessary death that could have been avoided if firearms were not in the equation
> 
> We need a sensible discussion of firearms in this country. It is not always all good or all bad
> 
> ...



The ONLY reason the guy could go crazy and be sure nobody would shoot HIM is the stupid gun free zone. HE KNEW he is the only one with a gun.

Did the idiot gun control law helped? No, it CAUSED the posssibility of altercation.

Yet the stupid gun grabbers pretend not to understand it.


Becasue their main aim is NOT the safety of the people, their main aim is to GRAB YOUR GUNS.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



So, what exactly is your justification for infringing on the 2nd Amendment rights of others? America has 315 million citizens. According to the last CDC report, 13,000+ people died from gunshot wounds or roughly 0.0000041% of the entire population. But suddenly you think we should limit or completely do away with gun ownership? Really?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



It doesn't matter what the owners consider it to be it's what the law considers it to be that matters. Their wishes are not going to protect me from a mad gunman. In a free society I am free to carry my firearm in any establishment that is not designated a "gun free" zone or is not displaying the proper signage that their respective laws require. 

IN other words, I don't honor any signs that don't meet legal standards. In Texas a 30.06 sign and a 51% sign are the only signs I'm required to adhere to.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



gun free zone is the reason this nut was absolutely sure he is going to be the only one armed and there is nobody else who can shoot HIM.


Would it e the otherwise - he might have keep his irritation to himself or handle the situation differently


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad









"but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad."

Actually, what is sadder, Jimmy, is the gun-grabbers ignoring the statistics.

Example:

Of the 51,078 permits that have been issued by the state since the law took effect in 2007, 44 permit holders have been charged with a crime while using a firearm through late October, according to records provided by the Kansas Attorney Generals Office. Few crimes committed by concealed-carry permit holders in Kansas | Wichita Eagle 



*(That is .00086% criminality.  Can you point to any other group....including gun-haters with such a record?)*


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



yes, we do.

The exact reason The Second is there.

The opressive, infringing on our rights greedy and ever expanding government.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



Such a stupid argument. You expose yourself.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

dannyboys said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Maybe if your gun laws weren't so lax the simians wouldn't be able to get any guns, because they sure aren't making them in their basements, they're buying American-made guns.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



So what the fuck are you all waiting for? Attack the US army already, I'm paid up at CNN.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 14, 2014)

Vandalshandle said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > What percentage of LEGAL gun owners ever shoot anyone?
> ...



That means nothing.

Besides not 100% of people who get shot die.

I guarantee you that right now this very second there are far more impaired drivers on the road in your town than there are people with carry permits.

Who do you think is the greater threat to your safety?


----------



## auditor0007 (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



Here is the issue; the argument from most on the right is not just that we don't have the right to take away guns, but that to make society safer, everyone should be carrying a gun on them at all times.  If that actually were the case and everyone was packing, we would see many more situations like this where someone gets mad at someone else and just shoots them.  There are a lot of people who cannot control their tempers in our society, and this was an ex-cop.  

BTW, I do hope everyone in prison finds out this sick fuck is an ex-cop when he gets to prison.  I hope they make his life miserable.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



fuck off, *alien *retard.

we will decide what to do ourselves.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

auditor0007 said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



Not true. Quite to the contrary.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...


I'm an American. I just don't live in the US, it's way too dangerous.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



And less bloody noses...


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

auditor0007 said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



History doesn't support your claim. Back in the old west for example gun fights were very rare.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



you are as American as I am Chinese.

Don't LIE.

your ignorance and stupidity in previous posts were pretty telling.

Our gun grabbers have totally different set of arguments than those from outside


----------



## 007 (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...


Never saw a bad guy that wanted to stare down the wrong end of barrel to steal a gun when he knows he can break into someone else's house and not, and steal something even more valuable like jewelry and/or money.

Never saw a bad guy that was able to break into a gun safe either.

Next dumb thing you have to say?


----------



## emilynghiem (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



1. The public schools and theatres can hire their own security, so nobody ELSE has to carry guns into the theatre which can be checked for in advance

2. Notice that the sheriff who responded after the shooting didn't have to shoot his gun
Most law enforcement is that way

3. In generally, both the police and military should improve screening in advance for mental health issues, mood or social disorders among their ranks to prevent Fort Hood incidents.

And for citizens, I would recommend the same Constitutional oath and training in order to be licensed to carry weapons, the same as required for police and military officers. I believe the same process of training people in law enforcement and PROCESS for confronting and stopping situations from escalating would PREVENT tragedies such as what happened with Zimmerman and Martin, and would provide SCREENING for mental health or criminal issues so people get treatment early instead of waiting until after crimes occur.

All this can be done voluntarily, by agreement freely adopted and enforced among citizens, law enforcement and government locally where it is not imposed by state or federal govt.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

007 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop



Or they could have called the cops ... To stop the cop.

.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

007 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...



For some reason, bad guys and guns go together

They are a great occupational tool and can be sold quickly for a lot of money. Not so much my HDTV

It is easy for a bad guy to tell if you are home. Knocking on the door usually helps. He knows for a fact you have guns. If you have a safe, good for you. for some reason, anyone dumb enough to put a stupid sign out like that probably has guns stashed out in the open.......just in case


----------



## NoNukes (Jan 14, 2014)

TakeAStepBack said:


> As gun ownership increases, gun related violent crime decreases. FACT.
> 
> But to morons, there is no good way to deal with it except to ban all firearms and make sure only those who authorize themselves and others, may have one. Typical hypocrites.



This is pretty much giving up on living in a modern, civilized society.


----------



## JamesMillman (Jan 14, 2014)

Anything can be used as a weapon, let's ban everything!


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Stop living in the past. Got a real reason that's valid for today's world?



Homeowner shoots, kills intruders | News - Home


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 14, 2014)

Homeowner Shoots 2 Intruders, Kills 1 | FOX8.com


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 14, 2014)

Police: Homeowner shoots, kills intruder | abc11.com


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Police: Homeowner shoots, kills intruder | abc11.com



So?

Does that make up for the guy in the theater?


----------



## NoNukes (Jan 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



Another genius jumps in.


----------



## NoNukes (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Homeowner shoots, kills intruder | abc11.com
> ...



I will keep score. 

GOOD.   1

BAD.      1


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



An expert on crime gun patterns, ATF agent Jay Wachtel says that most guns used in crimes are not stolen out of private gun owners' homes and cars. 

In fact, there are a number of sources that allow guns to fall into the wrong hands, with gun thefts at the bottom of the list. Wachtel says one of the most common ways criminals get guns is through straw purchase sales.

The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers

Another large source of guns used in crimes are unlicensed street dealers who either get their guns through illegal transactions with licensed dealers, straw purchases, or from gun thefts. These illegal dealers turn around and sell these illegally on the street. An additional way criminals gain access to guns is family and friends, either through sales, theft or as gifts.

Source:


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Homeowner shoots, kills intruder | abc11.com
> ...



Does for the homeowner still alive.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 14, 2014)

NoNukes said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Keep score.  That's fucked.


----------



## TemplarKormac (Jan 14, 2014)

NoNukes said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Do you think murder is a fucking game, Nukes? What about a man defending himself from intruders in his own home? Whatcha gonna do when that happens? Wet yourself?


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



You're actually comparing as aspect of our Constitution to Certs? 

It doesn't mention a "right" to a militia.  It just says it's "necessary".  It's a basis for what follows.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 14, 2014)

For every person that commits a crime with a gun there is zero impact on my possession.

If anything it makes for more reason to carry.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

TemplarKormac said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Slacker said:
> ...



No, I'm talking big picture, not just crimes.  Our values are those of violence.  We've been at war somewhere or other for my entire lifetime, and I'm way older than you.  That's a culture of violence.  We play video games involving blowing things up and chopping heads off.  That's a culture of violence.  Every prime time TV lineup and most movies involve some kind of killing or beating or dismemberment.  That's a culture of violence. Ingrained values that just glorify death and destruction at every turn.

Hell we even pave over our wetlands and forests and extinguish the flora and fauna therein just as we exterminated Native Americans.  If that's not a culture of testosterone-huffing violence I don't know what is.  Just look at the very next post after yours:



Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> It's more than obvious you have no balls.



Your witness, counselor.


----------



## westwall (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...








Nope, the Bill of Rights is 9 limitations on what government can do, and one final option.  Jefferson was very clear that he knew that ALL governments grow corrupt and he wanted to make sure that the citizens of this country had the means to remove an illegitimate government.


----------



## JimH52 (Jan 14, 2014)

Defiant1 said:


> At this point it appears the retired LEO is in the wrong.  However, the other side of the story hasn't been heard.
> 
> It is possible that the person texting became belligerent and the retired LEO perceived his behavior as a threat.
> 
> We shall see.



So you are saying this was a justified shooting?  Explain


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

NoNukes said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > As gun ownership increases, gun related violent crime decreases. FACT.
> ...


----------



## westwall (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Homeowner shoots, kills intruder | abc11.com
> ...








It does to the guy who defended himself.


----------



## JimH52 (Jan 14, 2014)

Slacker said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



True but they do make it a lot quicker and a lot easier...Just saying


----------



## JimH52 (Jan 14, 2014)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Wait, are we talking the guy in the theater?  The retired cop with the gun was defending himself......from the dreadful effects of texting in theater?  Please tell me you are not...


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2014)

I'm thankful that I still live in a country that at least lets me decide if I should own a firearm.

And by the way, over the weekend here in Oregon, a man with a concealed carry permit stopped another man who began to shoot people inside of a nightclub from shooting more people.


----------



## Slacker (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



That's not the one I was talking about. 
_Manslaughter Charge in Hockey Death:
A hockey father accused in the beating death of another hockey dad at a youth game pleaded innocent today to a manslaughter charge. 

Thomas Junta, 42, of Reading, Mass. was charged with manslaughter for allegedly beating 40-year-old Michael Costin of nearby Lynnfield unconscious on Wednesday in a dispute over rough play in a youth hockey game. _

You're missing the point anyway. Whether it's a gun or a fist, it's the person that is the problem.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



If mayhem and murder were one's objective, it would be easy to do that.  Just find a crowded street, point it and punch it.

Why doesn't that happen all the time?  Because we don't have an endless stream of TV shows showing people driving cars into crowds, we don't have endless video games giving the option of driving a car into a crowd, we don't have movies of people driving cars into crowds; we don't have a history of exterminating Indians and making wars by getting into cars and running them down.  Nor do we have a culture of swords or poisons or shillelaghs.  Rather, we have a culture where all of those media celebrate firearms and explosions.  Continuously.  As a result we get Luby's and Columbines and Newtowns and Auroras and Austins and Tucsons and Lancasters and Oak Creeks and Virginia Techs and two idiots shooting innocent people from the trunk of a freaking car.

Connect the dots.  Ain't rocket surgery.


----------



## westwall (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...











No, I was responding to a rightwinger post.  The shooting in the theatre is simply ridiculous.  There is nothing to justify that.  Might give people pause though.  Are you SURE you only want cops to have guns?


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

Blame it on society. When all else fails.


----------



## westwall (Jan 14, 2014)

DigitalDrifter said:


> I'm thankful that I still live in a country that at least lets me decide if I should own a firearm.
> 
> And by the way, over the weekend here in Oregon, a man with a concealed carry permit stopped another man who began to shoot people inside of a nightclub from shooting more people.








Link please!


----------



## Slacker (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



This one ended in a death and he was beaten with fists. The problem is the person, not the weapon.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?



"one nut case"?  

How many nut cases have driven into a crowd?  Post them, and then I'll respond with all of the nut cases since Columbine who shot and killed innocents.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jan 14, 2014)

Wry Catcher said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



Logical fallacies.; you do it like it's your job.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Slacker said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Slacker said:
> ...



That's twelve years ago, but yes, it just underscores my point that we live in a culture of violence.   As well as a culture of gun fetishism, even if the latter wasn't involved in this case.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Blame it on society. When all else fails.



Some of your wittier wags here want to blame it on "gun free zone" signs.

You tell me which makes sense.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jan 14, 2014)

martybegan said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> ...



I have no problem with that.  Active LE officers exhibiting substance abuse or other mental health issues will be investigated and placed on desk duty until cleared or fired.  No one supervises retired LE.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2014)

westwall said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > I'm thankful that I still live in a country that at least lets me decide if I should own a firearm.
> ...



Here you go.
*Night club bouncer who shot back 'hero'


Night club bouncer who shot back 'hero'*


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> It's Florida. People know that anybody next to you can be packing.
> And generally people are polite and self-restrained.











I can do without this kind of "polite", thanks.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > It's Florida. People know that anybody next to you can be packing.
> ...



Yes you see that everyday.

I went to my doctor today. He came in with his nurse both pointing guns at me.

SO I pulled my gun and we pointed them at each other.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Do you really think your guns can shoot themselves?



Good point.  So, to be effective, we don't need to focus on firearms, we need to focus on those who shoot them.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



Horse shit stop implying what isn't their.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



Usually does no good to those who are in the other category.  

BTW, your posts imply that death is the only outcome that's possible.  Often, the presence of a firearms ends the potential violence.


----------



## JimH52 (Jan 14, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



Cool!  I hear a coloscopy go easier when a gun is involved!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



your so called private information isn't protected under the 4th amendment on the internet no one back then thought of computers would you agree?


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 14, 2014)

auditor0007 said:


> and this was an ex-cop.



an ex-cop who was 30 or so years older than the guy who was apparently aggressively out of his seat and advancing.  

Why didn't the guy just keep his seat and watch the movie until something else happened?  Isn't that what a reasonable person would have done?


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > At this point it appears the retired LEO is in the wrong.  However, the other side of the story hasn't been heard.
> ...



I said, it's possible.

In Florida a person doesn't have to wait to be hit or to see if the other person has a weapon to perceive a threat.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



We can also be sure that if everyone would act like an adult and remember it's a game between kids and not act like arses, everyone would be 100% safe from each other.


----------



## Redfish (Jan 14, 2014)

hangover said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Nope, but if some thug threatens me or my family with physical harm, I will shoot him.  I have a CC permit and know how and when to use a firearm.  

I would even use a gun to protect an asshole like you if you were about to be killed by a thug with a weapon.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



See?  That's why productivity goes down.


----------



## Redfish (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Blame it on society. When all else fails.
> ...



who do we blame for a screwed up society full of angry people who resort to violence???  

How about Hollywood, the music industry, ghetto culture, fatherless families, Washington DC--------in other words--liberalism.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



There's also the frustration of living in a time of few jobs and increasing taxes.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Jan 14, 2014)

Let go, nutters. Just let go.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Redfish said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



None of those are political enities, Einstein.

No wonder some wags can't tell the difference between Liberalism and leftism.  They can't even tell the difference between politics and culture.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

I need my 9MM because there are some extrmely aggressive and vicius pack rats down here in the desert. Also, those prairie dogs run in packs, you know. A man has to vigilant.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



it doesn't mention a right to a gun a s well.

It gives the right to ORGANIZE militia and to own and carry guns


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> No, I'm talking big picture, not just crimes.  Our values are those of violence.  We've been at war somewhere or other for my entire lifetime, and I'm way older than you.  That's a culture of violence.  We play video games involving blowing things up and chopping heads off.  That's a culture of violence.  Every prime time TV lineup and most movies involve some kind of killing or beating or dismemberment.  That's a culture of violence. Ingrained values that just glorify death and destruction at every turn.
> 
> Hell we even pave over our wetlands and forests and extinguish the flora and fauna therein just as we exterminated Native Americans.  If that's not a culture of testosterone-huffing violence I don't know what is.  Just look at the very next post after yours:



This part I actually agree with.

However the need to violence is, most probably, dependent of the history of the nation.
If people are just sitting at one place for thousands years - their traditions and values will differ form the people who are constant warriors and nomads - a bit of colorful embellishment here, but essentially Americans as a nation ARE modern nomads and warriors.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



No, actually it doesn't say the former.  It just says it's "necessary to the security of a free State".  Doesn't say anything about whether that State can allow or not allow a militia.  What was singled out specifically was "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms".  The difference between expressed and implied.


----------



## Politico (Jan 14, 2014)

Indofred said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> ...



No what's insane is that police departments give too many whackos guns. There is no downside for us sane people. Especially with folks like that on the street.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Blame it on society. When all else fails.
> ...



BOTH.

the gun free zone just enables the easy outlet for the release of the steam.

They stab each other to death in the gun-free societies.

As a mass stabbing as well. or find the other way to cause massive damage.

if the steam pressure is generated - the valve might have a different shape and construction, but it still would be found and yanked off one way or the other.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > It's Florida. People know that anybody next to you can be packing.
> ...



Bullshit from the gun-free zone idiot caricaturist ( is it from New Yorker? )


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

The only mass stabbing that I am aware of was in the movie, "Kill Bill".


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 14, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



to each his own i guess 

i rather just avoid going to places 

with such attitudes 

works out best for us


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...





> A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



*both should not be infringed* - a well regulated militia - which means you can organize militia for the security of the FREE state ( and if the government clenches its claws on you it is NOT a free state anymore) - and the right to keep and bear arms - that it TWO rights in one Amendment


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



No.  They're satire, a type of humor that exhibits how silly an argument is by taking it to its (il)logical conclusion.   The second one is Tom Tomorrow.  Not sure who drew the first one.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Vox said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...



True.  If we had a sword-fetish society, we'd have sword murders and occasional mass swordings.

The unfortunate difference is, you can't sit in a tower, or in an upper floor of a mall, or in the trunk of a car, and sword people.

For that matter, you couldn't mass-assault a roomful of Amish girls with the firearm technology of the 18th century either.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> No.  They're satire, a type of humor that exhibits how silly an argument is by taking it to its (il)logical conclusion.   The second one is Tom Tomorrow.  Not sure who drew the first one.



That's what I meant.

That is what New Yorker is. Basically a satirical magazine - their tone is very special, not everybody likes it.

and they have a lot of caricatures of very similar taste . I don't mean guns only, just the spice of it
Like this one:


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



do you know that you can assemble means of mass murder in your basement, using the Home Depot and the internet?

I would not name the specific items and means, but it is not only pressure cookers and nails which can be used if somebody needs to release the pressure of the steam.

The question is - WHAT is the cause of the pressure buildup.

And why is it intensifying across the board and in the societies which are getting more affluent ( these types of problems do not exist that often in the poor countries)


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2014)

The left needs to get over the fear of guns. The chances of one of you getting hurt in a movie theatre, or in any place where people congregate is extremely low.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Tied in to this question of human nature:

>> In a regretful letter penned a few months before his death, Mikhail Kalashnikov, the designer of the AK-47 assault rifle, asked the head of the Russian Orthodox Church if he was to blame for the deaths of those killed by his weapon.

The Russian daily Izvestia on Monday published the letter, in which Kalashnikov, who died last month at 94, told Patriarch Kirill that he kept asking himself if he was responsible. The AK-47 is the world's most popular firearm, with an estimated 100 million spread around the world.

"The pain in my soul is unbearable. I keep asking myself the same unsolvable question: If my assault rifle took people's lives, it means that I, Mikhail Kalashnikov, ... son of a farmer and Orthodox Christian am responsible for people's deaths," he said in the letter.

Kalashnikov also shared his bitter thoughts about humankind.

"The longer I live, the more often that question gets into my brain, the deeper I go in my thoughts and guesses about why the Almighty allowed humans to have devilish desires of envy, greed and aggression," Kalashnikov continued. "Everything changes, only a man and his thinking remain unchanged: he's just as greedy, evil, heartless and restless as before!"

... The letter, which was sent in April, contrasted sharply with past statements by Kalashnikov, who had repeatedly said in interviews and public speeches that he created the weapon to protect his country and couldn't be blamed for other people's action. <<  (ABC Nooz)


----------



## Slacker (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slacker said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



I agree that violence is the problem. It will continue to exist even if guns go away.  A culture of "gun fetishism" doesn't cause violence. The problem is what needs to be fixed.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 14, 2014)

A well armed militia in today's world would need nukes. Maybe tanks and other shit as well...


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Right, a culture of "gun fetishism" doesn't cause violence.  Given that society's fascination with violence, it causes* gun* violence specifically.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



Or it could have been anyone with a gun and no permit.

Or it could have been anyone with a knife.

Or it could have been anyone who knows to punch someone in the throat to kill them.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



Damn, that was a stupid premise if I ever saw one.

Every single state exempts cops and ex cops from the gun control laws. In other words, even if all your gun control measures were in place, this guy would still have had a gun. Until you are willing to apply the exact same standards to everyone, including cops, don't even talk to me about gun control.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



No, but you can take fertilizer, diesel fuel, and make a bomb that would kill 168 people and injury 680.  No gun needed.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop



It would have prevented a murder.

Funny thing, if another cop had been in the theater, and done what you suggest, you would be supporting him until after Hell thawed out.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

WinterBorn said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



Diesel fuel?  In the 18th century?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

martybegan said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> ...



It went over so well that New York changed the SAFE Act before the ink had dried on the 1st draft.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

DigitalDrifter said:


> The left needs to get over the fear of guns. The chances of one of you getting hurt in a movie theatre, or in any place where people congregate is extremely low.



Do you feel lucky?

We have three times the murder rate of any other industrialized nation


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Upper floor of a mall in the 18th century?

Trunk of a car in the 18th century?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Well if everyone in the theater was armed, they could have shot the cop
> ...



I want to rephrase this so it reflects the  actual facts in this case. Doing it this way so that assholes cannot accuse me of misquoting Dudley doWrong.

Too bad it was AFTER a asshole cop with a gun stopped an innocent citizen with a phone.

​


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Do you really think your guns can shoot themselves?
> ...



That's the idea........keep them away from guns


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > JimH52 said:
> ...



You support disarming police? If not, I suggest you think about how you want to rephrase your stupidity.

By the way, did anyone check to see if the theater has a no guns allowed sign? A cop, being above the law, would just flash a badge and get a pass, but most civilians would prefer to see the movie rather than argue the law.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



I haven't seen you ever demand that cops not carry weapons. Until you do, I am not the one defending anything.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



I actually think it is because, being a cop, he thought he was above the law.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Tied in to this question of human nature:
> 
> >> In a regretful letter penned a few months before his death, Mikhail Kalashnikov, the designer of the AK-47 assault rifle, asked the head of the Russian Orthodox Church if he was to blame for the deaths of those killed by his weapon.
> 
> ...



ha. when death looks into your eyes...

He did not have any choice then, though.
It was 1945.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



He is no cop......he is a an excop playing tough guy in a movie theater

His carrying a gun turned a minor disagreement into a fatality


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Funny thing, since it was an ex cop that did this, even if you had exactly the gun control laws you want, *IT WOULD NOT HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE.* Until the laws apply equally to everyone, with no exceptions because of job status, you are never going to win the gun control debate.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

WinterBorn said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



I didn't propose those comparisons. 
But they'll work to the same point.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Right, a culture of "gun fetishism" doesn't cause violence.  Given that society's fascination with violence, it causes* gun* violence specifically.



I think it just makes finding the means to channel the buildup of the aggression easier, but is not a CAUSE of the aggression per se. Secondary stimulation, most likely.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

NoNukes said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



Feel free to provide examples of all the legal gun owners shooting people over disagreements in theaters, just be sure to leave out the examples that include the people you think should be exempt from the laws, like cops.


----------



## KGB (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



no, it's the evil intent that kills people.  Guns are merely the way they do it.  Taking away my rights isn't going to make you safe from evil.  When will you libs ever understand this?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Do you plan on getting help for your delusions anytime soon?

Just asking because, if you do, I will need to find another target for ridicule. Personally, I prefer that you don't, it is fun mocking the mentally ill.

To everyone, feel free to take insult because I am mocking an idiot by referring to him as mentally ill.

By the way, are you aware that, on the technology scale, long range weapons predate swords?

Also, anyone that thinks a blunderbuss is less lethal than a 9 mm pistol has never seen the business end of a blunderbuss.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



"Police" does not automatically mean "armed".
Unless you live in a gun fetish culture of course.


----------



## KGB (Jan 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



the NRA hasn't terrorized anyone.  It's a lack of recognition that evil exists in this world.  If anything, the NRA has been brutally honest about it.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Would you prefer kerosene?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > The left needs to get over the fear of guns. The chances of one of you getting hurt in a movie theatre, or in any place where people congregate is extremely low.
> ...



No we do not.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



He wasn't just a cop, he was SWAT. That means that, by law, he is specifically allowed to carry a weapon anywhere, even onto an aircraft.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The only people that fuck guns are progressive assholes.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



There's hardly a difference, but inasmuch as Rudolf Diesel wouldn't even be born until 8 decades after the Constitution, it seemed unlikely.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



"Fuck guns"?

What in the wide world of fuck does that mean?


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Whale oil


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Afraid we do

Guns don't kill people.......people with guns kill people


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Its more a matter of our society condoning violence as a legitimate means of conflict resolution  be it corporal punishment in our schools or capital punishment in our prisons.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 14, 2014)

westwall said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Jefferson was not the only Founding Father, and the Framers were never of one mind as to any aspect of the Constitution. 

Which is why the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law. 

And Second Amendment case law acknowledges a right to self-defense and the right to own a handgun pursuant to the right of self-defense, unconnected with militia service. By codifying an individual right of self-defense, the Second Amendment in no way authorizes armed rebellion against a Federal government subjectively perceived by some to have become tyrannical. 

Indeed, the Second Amendment doesnt trump the First Amendment, citizens first and foremost have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances, to seek relief from government excess through the ballot box or the Federal courts, where citizens are not authorized to take it upon themselves to take up arms against the Federal government without the consent of a majority of all the people of the Nation; to do so without the consent of the majority of the American people would be an act of treason and rebellion, not an act of restoration.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



It seems a failed attempt at being clever.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



ANFO does not require diesel fuel, it just requires fuel oil. I think diesel makes a more stable mixture, but you can, theoretically, use jet fuel if you want.

Not actually sure about the chemistry there, so won't try to defend all of it.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



People with a gun fetish get off sexually on guns.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



What you actually said was: "True. If we had a sword-fetish society, we'd have sword murders and occasional mass swordings.

The unfortunate difference is, you can't sit in a tower, or in an upper floor of a mall, or in the trunk of a car, and sword people.

For that matter, you couldn't mass-assault a roomful of Amish girls with the firearm technology of the 18th century either."

I responded by pointing out that guns are not required to kill a large number of people.

My example is valid.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



I guess we have a different definition of industrialized. Feel free to explain yours in such a way that it actually excludes countries like Russia.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...




Di you have another brain fart?


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 14, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



yea, you would think with all the back ground checks and psychoanalysis done on cops this never should have happened.


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 14, 2014)

could have been any one with a carry permit, how ever the hundreds of millions with carry permits aren't out there killing people now are they?  so I guess your assumption is a little flawed.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Oh I see......

We get to set our standards on Russia now


How the mighty have fallen


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

WinterBorn said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



The points were not what is required to kill large numbers of people.  The latter point was what the firearm technology (firearm specifically) that existed at the time the Second Amendment was writ, would not have been capable of what today's is.  And the former point was that the cultural fetish feeds the cultural flaw, in this case gun violence.

It wouldn't have to be guns.  As note it could be swords, but that would require a sword fetish culture.  Which we don't have, which is why we don't have litanies of sword slaughter.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Ummm... "fetish" doesn't necessarily mean anything sexual.

Full Definition of FETISH

>> *1
a :  an object (as a small stone carving of an animal) believed to have magical power to protect or aid its owner; broadly :  a material object regarded with superstitious or extravagant trust or reverence
b :  an object of irrational reverence or obsessive devotion :  prepossession*
c :  an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression <<  (M-W)


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Obviously your knowledge of history and weapons sucks.

_The unfortunate difference is, you can't sit in a tower, or in an upper floor of a mall, or in the trunk of a car, and sword people._

But arrows, crossbow bolts, or bullets from bow or sling have been doing the job quite nicely for most of recorded history.

_For that matter, you couldn't mass-assault a roomful of Amish girls with the firearm technology of the 18th century either_

Of course you could. You never heard of fowling pieces, shotguns, muskets, multi-barreled weapons or cannons?
Never read about the Aztecs, Incas, or American Indians in the 15th and 16th centuries?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



No, we set our standards by language. You claimed that we have the worst murder rate among industrialized nations, I want to know what the fuck that means to you. Did you mean civilized? Perhaps you meant Western, or White. How am  I supposed to interpret your fucking point if you can't put it into fucking context? Should I just assume you are a racist douchebag?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



What, exactly, do you think modern firearms can do that 18th century technology could not? Keep in mind that the  fact that you are pathetically ignorant doesn't mean that I am.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



What low standards you set


We no longer compare ourselves to Canada, Japan, Italy, France, Germany, Australia..........gun nuts brag we are doing better than Russia


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



If you think people worship guns, you haven't been paying attention.

Then again, you think that it was impossible to fire more than one round without reloading anything made before 1920, so I am not terribly surprised.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...



Well, I know what "automatic" means, asshole.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Is there a mouse in your pocket, or are you trying to put words in my mouth.

You claimed that we have a murder rate 3 times higher than any industrialized nation. What, exactly, does that mean to you?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Are you aware that automatic weapons are, essentially, illegal in the United States? 

Like I said, the fact that you are pathetically ignorant does not mean I am.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



And if you think the Constitution was written in 1920 I'm even less surprised.

Absolutely it's a fetish, i.e. an irrational attachment to a neuter object.  Check out the hissyfits that said fetishists lapse into at the mere suggestion that they have a problem.  Like a toddler having his pacifier taken away.  Read the thread, just today.  Read any thread on these values.  Read your own posts.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



So we're moving from "can do" to "illegal"...




You're such a toy.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

_I'll do more than "imply". I will state outright that anyone with a gun is a potential killer/murderer. Being ready and able to kill is the only reason to carry a gun_

You say that like it's a bad thing. He or she is also a potential savior, provider of food for the hungry, or prepared soldier.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



You're a bore get's some more talking points.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



The Constitution dates from late in the 18th century, but you keep blathering about 17th century technology, just saying.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Did you know that most of the weapons that Charles Whitmore, the tower shooter you referenced earlier, were bolt action? 

In other words, it is pretty easy to kill large numbers of people even without semi automatic weapons.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



Pogo, I think you missed this.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



The action is irrelevant.  The point, which has been muddled, is that you can't do a Charles Whitman or a John Muhammad or (fill in the rest) with a sword.  Firearms are in a class by themselves.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



No, what you're leaving out is the action of the victims... i.e. in the time it takes the 18th century musketeer to load and reload, the Amish girls or the Newtown kids have plenty of time to scatter.  The bottom line is that at the time the Constitution was written, Sandy Hook was inconceivable.


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



actually the first machine gun was made like 60 years before the constitution and a decade before the 2nd amendment the same founding fathers had placed an order for a developmental weapon that used a large capacity magazine and was capable of firing at the same rate as modern day AR 15


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



Wrong. You aren't reading. As noted:  *fowling pieces, shotguns, muskets, multi-barreled weapons or cannons?* don't have to be reloaded to put multiple shots or a massive amount of projectiles in the air. "Punt" guns were being used to kill whole flocks of ducks with a single shot. You are clearly wrong and just unwilling to admit it.


----------



## LeadRoundNose (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Wasn't it a .30-06?


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > The left needs to get over the fear of guns. The chances of one of you getting hurt in a movie theatre, or in any place where people congregate is extremely low.
> ...



I feel fine.
Are you afraid to go places in fear that someone might whip out a gun and shoot you ?


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

DigitalDrifter said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



I sure as hell was in New Orleans...especially on New Years's eve, when the whole damned city goes out and fiires their weapons into the sky at midnight.

Anyone crossing from the French Quarter to the other side of Rampart Street, is on a suicide mission, day or night.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



By the end of this year, I'll probably have about twenty guns of varying types.

So just think, I will be having sex with quite the variety of tastes. Sometimes even with multiple partners at once.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 14, 2014)

DigitalDrifter said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Does having a fire extinguisher indicate you live in fear of fire?


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2014)

Vandalshandle said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



So then people are dropping like flies on New Years eve every year in New Orleans.
Sorry about that, I've missed the stories.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Just a healthy respect for fire.


----------



## whitehall (Jan 14, 2014)

The 2nd Amendment issue has been upheld by the supreme court but here we go again. To paraphrase a high profile democrat politician, "never let a tragedy go to waste if you can turn it into a political rant".


----------



## TemplarKormac (Jan 14, 2014)




----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Somehow, that does not surprise me....



United States[edit]
 July 4, 2013: A 7-year old boy, Brendon Mackey, was struck in the top of his head and killed while walking with his father shortly before 9 p.m. amid a large crowd prior to the fireworks display over the Swift Creek Reservoir. [21]
 July 4, 2012: A 34-year woman, Michelle Packard, was struck in the head and killed while watching the fireworks with her family. The police believe the shot could have come from a mile away.[22]
 January 1, 2010: A four-year-old boy, Marquel Peters, was struck by a bullet and killed inside his church The Church of God of Prophecy in Decatur, GA. It is presumed the bullet may have penetrated the roof of the church around 12:20AM.[23]
 December 28, 2005: A 23-year-old U.S. Army private on leave after basic training fired a 9mm pistol into the air in celebration with friends, according to police, and one of the bullets came through a fifth-floor apartment window in the New York City borough of Queens, striking a 28-year-old mother of two in the eye. Her husband found her lifeless body moments later. The shooter had been drinking the night before and turned himself in to police the next morning when he heard the news. He was charged with second-degree manslaughter and weapons-related crimes,[24][25] and was later found guilty and sentenced to four to 12 years in prison.[26]
 June 14, 1999: Arizona, A fourteen year-old girl, Shannon Smith, was struck on the top of her head by a bullet and killed while in the backyard of her home. [27] This incident resulted in Arizona enacting "Shannon's Law" in 2000, that made the discharge of a firearm into the air illegal[28]
 December 31, 1994: Amy Silberman, a tourist from Boston, was killed by a falling bullet from celebratory firing while walking on the Riverwalk in the French Quarter of New Orleans, Louisiana. The Police Department there has been striving to educate the public on the danger since then, frequently making arrests for firing into the air.[29][dead link]

BTW, Louis Armstrong was arrested and put into an orphanage in New Orleans for doing the same thing when he was 7. that is where he learned to play the coronet.

Wiki


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

Vandalshandle said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



I remember Amy Silberman, when that happened.

So what does it take to think of that -- to fire a gun into the air, at nothing?  It takes a gun-obsessed culture.  What a weird thing to do.


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 14, 2014)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > I sure as hell was in New Orleans...especially on New Years's eve, when the whole damned city goes out and fiires their weapons into the sky at midnight.
> ...



The last time someone was killed by celebratory fire on New Years Eve in New Orleans was in 1994 ... Amy Silberman, a tourist from Boston.

I still don't go to New Orleans without a firearm ... Even if I am eating dinner at Dickey Brennan's I am packing.
Of course some people get searched before they go into clubs and bars ... I guess I don't get searched because I just don't look dangerous and don't start trouble.

.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

"The last time someone was killed by celebratory fire on New Years Eve in New Orleans was in 1994 ... Amy Silberman, a tourist from Boston."

You are going to minimalize this, because it does not happen every year?

Ok.

And good luck with your firearm in New Orleans. The average inner city 16 year old kid is not only faster than you, but outguns you, as well.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...




But we here know better. 

I tell ya what, if I see you there I'll alert them.  Maybe I'll volunteer to search you 

That amazed me when I moved there, people walking around packing as if it were an umbrella.  People go to work packing heat.  Weird.  I'm glad not to live among that kind of scene any more.


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 14, 2014)

Vandalshandle said:


> "The last time someone was killed by celebratory fire on New Years Eve in New Orleans was in 1994 ... Amy Silberman, a tourist from Boston."
> 
> You are going to minimalize this, because it does not happen every year?
> 
> ...



No more than you minimalized the 38 deaths reported by one hospital in Los Angeles between 1985 and 1992 ... But that wasn't the point either ... And I wasn't minimalizing anything.
Plus you have no idea who you are talking to, what I carry nor what I can or cannot do ... But hey, if it makes you feel better, knock yourself out ... I am laughing.

.


----------



## Vox (Jan 14, 2014)

Vandalshandle said:


> "The last time someone was killed by celebratory fire on New Years Eve in New Orleans was in 1994 ... Amy Silberman, a tourist from Boston."
> 
> You are going to minimalize this, because it does not happen every year?
> 
> ...



Not true.

just a ghetto legend.


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> But we here know better.
> 
> I tell ya what, if I see you there I'll alert them.  Maybe I'll volunteer to search you
> 
> That amazed me when I moved there, people walking around packing as if it were an umbrella.  People go to work packing heat.  Weird.  I'm glad not to live among that kind of scene any more.



Oh come on now Pogo ... You and I both know what you mean about 'gun culture' ... And we pretty much agree. ... We just don't agree with the fix.
I would warn you about giving me a hard time in New Orleans ... I got friends there that might not take kindly to you causing me problems ... You know how that works ... 

.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > But we here know better.
> ...



We don't?  How do we know?  Have we even discussed the fix?

I have lots of friends in N'awlins dear.  I know all about siccing my friends on your friends.  Yeah you rite.


----------



## SmedlyButler (Jan 14, 2014)

Sorry I did't see your post before posting on the same subject. A pretty good argument for strict background checks wouldn't you agree?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Ignorant, irresponsible, and criminal as well.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

SmedlyButler said:


> Sorry I did't see your post before posting on the same subject. A pretty good argument for strict background checks wouldn't you agree?



Not sure who you're posting to but I heartily approve of your namesake.  Welcome to the site


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> We don't?  How do we know?  Have we even discussed the fix?
> 
> I have lots of friends in N'awlins dear.  I know all about siccing my friends on your friends.  Yeah you rite.



Oh yeah, we discussed it before ... Maybe you forgot ... And for the record I didn't say I would actually have to say or do anything for you to get yourself in trouble messing with me.

It would be fun to watch anyway ... As long as no one got seriously hurt ... 

.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 14, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > We don't?  How do we know?  Have we even discussed the fix?
> ...



Obviously it plowed a deep-groove impression in the cotton field vinyl record of my mind.  --- why do I get the idea we didn't come up with anything profound... 

Speaking of which I left you a li'l sump'm in the Jukebox...


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 14, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > "The last time someone was killed by celebratory fire on New Years Eve in New Orleans was in 1994 ... Amy Silberman, a tourist from Boston."
> ...



It seems only fair to tell you that I do not have a clue as to what you are talking about in Los Angeles.

But I can tell you this. I lived in New Orleans for 10 years, and there are nieghborhoods where even the cops don't enter at night unless they are in teams of four. So, unless you are Sylvester Stallone, I feel secure in telling you that, even with my firearms training through the Pima County Sheriff's  department, I would not enter certain nieghborhoods in New Orleans without a bazookaza, but I bow down to you, the ultimate terminator, who is prepared to take on an entire group of gangsters who are armed to the teeth, have nothing to lose, and hate your guts, just for being in their neighborhood.

Of course, if you have George Zimmerman with you, that would be a different story altogether.....


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Do you have a sword fetish? Isn't it a little risky to stick sharp objects into your anal cavity?

The point is that you are an ignorant ass.


----------



## SmedlyButler (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> SmedlyButler said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry I did't see your post before posting on the same subject. A pretty good argument for strict background checks wouldn't you agree?
> ...



I'm a little confused by the UI but I'm not a total numbskull (my claim anyway) so I'll get it. Thx for the welcome.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



I do not.  Some gun fetishists like to compare guns to swords, baseball bats, or even cars.  An argument of Thoreauean quiet desperation.  So we show them why oranges are not apples.

Got a problem with that then?




Quantum Windbag said:


> Isn't it a little risky to stick sharp objects into your anal cavity?



I would assume so, and good for you for asking advice.  Let us know how that works out.



Quantum Windbag said:


> The point is that you are an ignorant ass.



"Point"... "sword"' I get it I get it.  That's the funniest pun I've heard in the last forty seconds.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

SmedlyButler said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > SmedlyButler said:
> ...



Just click the "quote" button of the post in question, and it will pop open your response window.  Write under that.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



This is a small example of a blunderbuss, a weapon designed to clear the deck of a ship. Tell me exactly how those Amish girls would fare when shot a .75 caliber blunderbuss being fired in their general direction.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

LeadRoundNose said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



I think that was the main weapon.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



A bit like posting on an anonymous message board and pretending you know about guns?


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 15, 2014)

_"I do not. Some gun fetishists like to compare guns to swords, baseball bats, or even cars. An argument of Thoreauean quiet desperation. So we show them why oranges are not apples."_

Gosh, you mean you are not *always* shown to be wrong like you have here?


----------



## NoNukes (Jan 15, 2014)

TemplarKormac said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



It just went right over your heads.

It is the people with guns who wet themselves.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> LeadRoundNose said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Remington model 700 6mm

he also had a 35 caliber and an assortment of others


----------



## TemplarKormac (Jan 15, 2014)

Your argument is invalid.


----------



## Politico (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



I am for disarming whacko police who think harsh words, angry eye contact and flying popcorn are lethal weapons. That is the real issue here, Not guns.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



I'm being sarcastic of course. If there was a regular stream of partiers being struck by stray bullets every New Years eve, there would be national news stories.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

TemplarKormac said:


> Your argument is invalid.



"Guns don't kill people.....People with guns kill people"


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Vandalshandle said:


> It seems only fair to tell you that I do not have a clue as to what you are talking about in Los Angeles.
> 
> But I can tell you this. I lived in New Orleans for 10 years, and there are nieghborhoods where even the cops don't enter at night unless they are in teams of four. So, unless you are Sylvester Stallone, I feel secure in telling you that, even with my firearms training through the Pima County Sheriff's  department, I would not enter certain nieghborhoods in New Orleans without a bazookaza, but I bow down to you, the ultimate terminator, who is prepared to take on an entire group of gangsters who are armed to the teeth, have nothing to lose, and hate your guts, just for being in their neighborhood.
> 
> Of course, if you have George Zimmerman with you, that would be a different story altogether.....



Like I said ... You don't know who or what you are talking about.
I don't have any business to do in the neighborhoods you are a talking about ... I don't need any drugs, and the places I frequent are  little easier to get to and more enjoyable.
I don't need to be Sylvester Stallone to get from the JW Marriot to Mike Anderson's.

I carry a firearm for the chances the criminals don't stay in their neighborhood.
It is hilarious ... Gun grabbing freaks call us nuts ... And then think we are going to try an armed assault on the 9th Ward.

.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Your argument is invalid.
> ...



People with knives kill people
People with fists kill people
People with feet kill people
People with baseball bats kill people
People with lead pipes kill people

Or in other words people kill people.

People always have killed people
People always will kill people


----------



## Peterf (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Your argument is invalid.
> ...




What Americans do is none of my business but I'm glad that there are very, very few "people with guns" in Sweden.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



That is a very good point....did you come up with it yourself?

But guns kill more people than knives, fists, feet, baseball bats, lead pipes combined

That is why we are concerned with gun violence


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

When someone gets shot, they say they died by gunshot, not by human being. Therefore, ipso facto, if the cause of death was by gunshot, guns kill people.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

Peterf said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > TemplarKormac said:
> ...



Sweden crime stats.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Sweden had 58 people killed by firearms....something we should aspire to


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> When someone gets shot, they say they died by gunshot, not by human being. Therefore, ipso facto, if the cause of death was by gunshot, guns kill people.



Ipso Facto ... Your determination is no more valid than the other ... "Gunshot" is a condition not a weapon ... The cause of death was "gunshot" not "gun" alone ... And still indicates an action resulting in a condition over a material item.

.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> When someone gets shot, they say they died by gunshot, not by human being. Therefore, ipso facto, if the cause of death was by gunshot, guns kill people.



You're confusing the cause of death with who caused the death. Look at any ME report and you will never see the cause of death being a person instead you will see things like blunt force trauma to the head, GSW to the chest, heart attack, unknown, natural causes....etc.

I'm glad you're no longer living in the US, we have enough ignorant people here already.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Peterf said:
> ...



There's a lot of guns in Sweden.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 15, 2014)

Politico said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




I'm just curious, how many blows, threats of bodily harm, etc. does a person have to endure before they should be allowed to defend themselves?


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

See video of open-carry gun advocate's confrontation with Grand Rapids Police that sparked lawsuit

See video of open-carry gun advocate's confrontation with Grand Rapids Police that sparked lawsuit | MLive.com


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



We have 300 million

How many do they have?


----------



## Wildman (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



were you born stupid or when you realized you were a liberal ??


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> See video of open-carry gun advocate's confrontation with Grand Rapids Police that sparked lawsuit
> 
> See video of open-carry gun advocate's confrontation with Grand Rapids Police that sparked lawsuit | MLive.com



In Part 3 the police officer said he didn't have a problem with the man exercising open carry if he called the department ahead of time and let them know.
The best part was when the supervisor showed up and the responding officer asked the supervisor what do to.

"Dust him off and let him go" ... Were the first words out of the Supervisor on the matter.

I am not knocking the police for stopping someone if they think there is probable cause ... But that doesn't mean you lecture them and try to rewrite the law in the process.
At the same time I wouldn't have argued with the police officer ... Requested a supervisor on scene ... And asked the cop to shut up until the supervisor got there.

.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

The irrational outrage and illogical posts from lefties here is a result of getting beaten numerous times by the NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and rational courts numerous times. It funny to read the abject stupidity that this butthurt has brought them to.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > See video of open-carry gun advocate's confrontation with Grand Rapids Police that sparked lawsuit
> ...



the 911 call is also on the site 

worth listening to

Listen to 911 caller report Grand Rapids man with holstered gun; federal lawsuit follows | MLive.com


----------



## Peterf (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



There are a good number of hunting weapons - rifles and shotguns - in Sweden.  Some owned by my brothers in law.    Neither they nor I know anyone, or have even heard of anyone, who owns a handgun.    

Such international statistical comparisons as I have seen do not differentiate between hand guns and hunting weapons and are therefore not much use in this context.


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Yeah well ... I think the dispatcher handled the caller better than the police handled the man.
If the responding officer had any guts at all and knew the law ... They should have approached him differently.
There was no cause for excessive alarm from the caller ... There was no indication of imminent danger. 
Unlawful detention could be an issue, although I would be less likely to pursue that if the police officer isn't an ass.

There were two firearms involved in the initial encounter ... And the only person pointing one at somebody and threatening them at the same time was the responding officer.

.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> The irrational outrage and illogical posts from lefties here is a result of getting beaten numerous times by the NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and rational courts numerous times. It funny to read the abject stupidity that this butthurt has brought them to.



Cool, another noob who prefers more dead people than less.

Osama bin Laden is nothing next to Wayne LaPierre. American guns kill way more people than Al-Qaeda ever did.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



When a police officer hears the word "gun" they automatically prepare for the worst. 

Not to defend the officers action but just clarifying his mindset. I wasn't able to see the video for some reason it never came up on the link provided but I'm wondering how much experience this officer had. In my experiences it's the younger cops that are more apt to respond in an excessive fashion when faced with an armed individual.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

Peterf said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



I imagine there's a lot of things that you haven't heard of. That doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

In Sweden, private possession of handguns (pistols and revolvers) is permitted under license, in some cases, but not for the protection of person or property.

Sweden  Gun Facts, Figures and the Law


----------



## dannyboys (Jan 15, 2014)

These LIB-pussy-men-who-pee-sitting-down are fools. Whenever they are in any sort of harms way who do they run to crying like the babies they are? Some one with a gun.
Some mental case starts waving a gun around in the supermarket and what's the first words out of these babies mouths? "ANYONE GOT A GUN?"


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> When a police officer hears the word "gun" they automatically prepare for the worst.
> 
> Not to defend the officers action but just clarifying his mindset. I wasn't able to see the video for some reason it never came up on the link provided but I'm wondering how much experience this officer had. In my experiences it's the younger cops that are more apt to respond in an excessive fashion when faced with an armed individual.



Well I think that is as much a part of our gun culture as anything else.

It is easy to understand that police officer is always thinking about worst possibilities ... But their duty is to serve and protect ... It is what they signed up for.
Waving a firearm around in a neighborhood with congested church traffic ... And with houses directly behind a man that is not breaking the law or acting suspiciously ... Would make me seriously doubt the judgment of the responding officer.

That poor police officer should be on desk duty until he can figure out it what it takes to man-up and respect the people he serves ... Before he gets someone killed.

.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > When a police officer hears the word "gun" they automatically prepare for the worst.
> ...



I agree, I didn't see the video but what you described was indeed improperly handled.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

dannyboys said:


> These LIB-pussy-men-who-pee-sitting-down are fools. Whenever they are in any sort of harms way who do they run to crying like the babies they are? Some one with a gun.
> Some mental case starts waving a gun around in the supermarket and what's the first words out of these babies mouths? "ANYONE GOT A GUN?"



What cartoon world do you live in?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



300 million averages out to less than one per person

That's not a lot.

Sweden has a population of 9 million so if they have more than 9 million guns in the country then they have more per person than we do.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > The irrational outrage and illogical posts from lefties here is a result of getting beaten numerous times by the NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and rational courts numerous times. It funny to read the abject stupidity that this butthurt has brought them to.
> ...



Oh, thanks for offering yourself up as an example of the stupidity I was talking about. If anyone was unclear about what and who I was talking about, they are clear now. Thanks.


----------



## Desperado (Jan 15, 2014)

*The downside of carrying a firearm...*

There's a downside?  wow, who knew.


----------



## Vox (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> *But guns kill more people than knives, fists, feet, baseball bats, lead pipes combined*That is why we are concerned with gun violence



Not true.

Actually plain* falling *kills TWICE as much people as firearms do.

should we ban sidewalks, roofs and ladders?


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > *But guns kill more people than knives, fists, feet, baseball bats, lead pipes combined*That is why we are concerned with gun violence
> ...



Falling is not murder

2/3 of all MURDERS are caused by guns

To claim we can't do anything about gun violence untill all other possible causes of death are eliminated is ridiculous


----------



## Vox (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Peterf said:
> ...



Sweden has 9 million people.

we have 320 million.

it is almost 40 times more than we do.

58x40 is 2360 which is not that impressively less than our 11 000.

*Most of our 11K is gang violence.

Sweden does not have gang violence at all.*Maybe we should address that aspect FIRST?


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...








Sweden has one gun for every four people, we have a gun for almost evry American

Our murder rate is three times that of Sweden


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 2/3 of all MURDERS are caused by guns



Wrong.  100% of all MURDERS are caused by people.  The tools they use are not the issue.  The violence they do IS the issue.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



How many of those are from legally owned registered firearms?

I'm all for getting rid of illegal guns as long as you leave law abiding people alone.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The murder rate is a red herring.

More people are killed by fists and feet than by rifles and shotguns combined.

And you have to be careful when comparing murder rates.  For example in the UK a death is only called a murder after there is a conviction whereas we count all deaths not by accident or suicide murder no matter if there is a conviction or not.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 2/3 of all MURDERS are caused by guns
> ...



Tools are absolutely the issue. having the tool of a gun at your disposal makes murder much easier

Countries with fewer guns have murder rates one third to one fifth of ours


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



link


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



Gun Nuts love to spout the myth that murders are primarily committed by bad guys with unregistered guns.

2/3 of murders are by someone you know with domestic violence the major portion of those murders


----------



## Vox (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



not true.

and the result is death, so it does not matter in the end.

actually you don't know how much falling is a foul play as well


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...


All guns in the US start out by being purchased legally, so in fact, it's the legal gun owners who are not responsible to take care of their shit, as well as too lax gun laws that don't punish the legal owners of the gun when it gets used in a crime.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Without the intent to murder, the firearm is nothing more than a paper weight.  If we were to address the criminal, the tool would be irrelevant.  100% of the firearms I own have never murdered another person.

And Countries with more guns per capita have murder rates that are lower than ours.  Switzerland and Sweden come to mind immediately as proof of that.  So, it's not the firearms, its the people.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



FBI ? Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

Rick Notes: Comparing England (or UK) murder rates with the US: More complex than you thought



> Since 1967, homicide figures for England and Wales have been adjusted to exclude any cases which do not result in conviction



House of Commons - Home Affairs - Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence

The sad thing is that anyone can find this stuff if they actually care to argue from an informed position.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

I'm still trying to find out how many gun deaths are caused by illegally obtained guns as compared to legally owned weapons.

Despite what you people might think that particular stat matters quite a lot.

Here's another tid bit I am trying to verify.

While the US might be near the top of gun deaths in the world where would we be if we excluded cities like LA, Detroit, Chicago and other violent places from the stats?

I'm guessing we'd be near the bottom of the list in that case.

Again that matters because it is more an indictment of the problems in our major cities than it is of the country and its citizens as a whole.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

Putting Gun Death Statistics in Perspective - Gangs Remain Key Unaddressed Problem in Gun Debate



> To hear gun control advocates speak, one would be led to believe that gun violence is a widespread problem whereby the mere existence of a gun is as much a problem as the person who intends to wield it. But the reality is that gun homicides are overwhelmingly tied to gang violence. In fact, a staggering 80% of gun homicides are gang-related. *According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), gang homicides accounted for roughly 8,900 of 11,100 gun murders in both 2010 and 2011. That means that there were just 2,200 non gang-related firearm murders in both years in a country of over 300 million people and 250 million guns.*



Gee Imagine that.

As I said the problem isn't gun owners it's the failure to control crime in our cities.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



Both Switzerland and Sweden have gun ownership of about one quarter of ours

The problem with gun violence goes beyond intent. The jerk in the movie theater did not intend to bring his gun to shoot someone....but when he lost his temper, the gun was there


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Why do you live in fear?


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



guns are used to prevent more crimes and murder than they are used to cause


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts

In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings.  This is the equivalent of more than 85 deaths each day and more than three deaths each hour.1

73,505 Americans were treated in hospital emergency departments for non-fatal gunshot wounds in 2010.2

Guns were used in 11,078 homicides in the U.S. in 2010, comprising almost 35% of all gun deaths, and over 68% of all homicides.6

On average, 33 gun homicides were committed each day for the years 2005-2010.7

Regions and states with higher rates of gun ownership have significantly higher rates of homicide than states with lower rates of gun ownership.8

Where guns are prevalent, there are significantly more homicides, particularly gun homicides.9

Firearms were used in 19,392 suicides in the U.S. in 2010, constituting almost 62% of all gun deaths.10

Over 50% of all suicides are committed with a firearm

In 2010, unintentional firearm injuries caused the deaths of 606 people.18

From 2005-2010, almost 3,800 people in the U.S. died from unintentional shootings.19

Over 1,300 victims of unintentional shootings for the period 2005&#8211;2010 were under 25 years of age


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



really.  more people were negatively impacted by obamacare than are negatively impacted by guns.  by rightwingers logic we should fear obamacare


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



Our murder rate does not support that


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts



And 80% of those gun homicides were gang related or in other words most likely committed by criminals with illegally obtained guns.

Suicides don't count as they are not murder.

So feel free to come up with a way to stop gang violence and get rid of illegally obtained firearms while leaving law abiding people alone and I'll bet law abiding people who happen to own guns will back you up 100%


----------



## Warrior102 (Jan 15, 2014)

editec said:


> Odd that this "nut-case" managed to fake sanity so long and so well that he retired as a CAPTAIN in the Tampa police.



Joe Biden's another example....


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts



cars and poisoning are bigger problems than guns, are not constitutional rights and libs are silent on them  libs don't care about problems, only agendas


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> The problem with gun violence goes beyond intent. The jerk in the movie theater did not intend to bring his gun to shoot someone....but when he lost his temper, the gun was there



And as you admitted yesterday, you have made your judgments prior to any facts being provided beyond the most basic ones. You don't know he was a jerk, all you know is that he and the victim were in an argument.  The older man left to find a manager.  He returned without a manager and was confronted by the victim who was 30 years younger and apparently argumentative.  The older man has pleaded not guilty because he felt threatened.  It's up to a court to decide if he was truly a "jerk" or if he was justified in the feelings he claims.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Why do you live in fear?



It seems to me that he lives in fear because he expects everyone to behave as he does.  He jumps to conclusions and acts in apparent emotion.  

I'd prefer HIM to not have a firearm, but it is his right.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts
> 
> In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings.  This is the equivalent of more than 85 deaths each day and more than three deaths each hour.1
> 
> ...


You have a better chance of winning the lottery twice than getting shot once using your stats.


----------



## Vox (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



yes, they do.

and most murders are commited NOT by firearms.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jan 15, 2014)

Hi CCJones: My new year's resolution is to take a more inclusive approach in forming partnerships to resolve conflicts, in order to write out a resolution to both parties by participating members to encourage the same thing, to include and not bully or discriminate against people by conflicting religious or political views which should all be equally protected and represented in fulfilling Constitutional principles and ethics.

I hope you will join with me and other members who are already making those efforts to be more inclusive, especially where we disagree and strive to correct the conflicts and/or respect that we have differences that should both be accounted for and not suppressed.

A. 





C_Clayton_Jones said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



A1. Before Jefferson was born or said anything about government, the natural laws of human nature already existed. Do you agree that humans have a nature to defend free will and the right to consent or dissent? So this is the basis of Constitutional law, to try to define and protect the consent of the governed, and due process/right to petition to redress grievances to avoid oppression (and violent conflict that tends to erupt from political oppression left unaddressed), and thus the free speech and freedom of the press necessary to communicate to facilitate the democratic process and to educate people to have equal access and knowledge in order to strive for equal justice and peace in society?

I agree that many different people and views went into the writing of the Constitution.

local points such as Natives or defense against British who sought to disarm the colonists are EXAMPLES of why right to defense is necessary; but the underlying issue that existed before and has always co-existed with human nature is the natural law that people will seek to defend their will, whether this means life liberty property or religious/political belief.

how you want to express that right of defense, can be in any number of ways. historically, yes I'm sure the people back then made the same myriad of different arguments and justifications that we do today, and probably didn't agree either which was more critical.

But they did agree on the second amendment as written, even though some states did have local militia and some did not, and people back then likely didn't agree what each other meant in how this law was to be applied. they were coming from different situations.

B.


			
				CCJ said:
			
		

> And Second Amendment case law acknowledges a right to self-defense and the right to own a handgun pursuant to the right of self-defense, unconnected with militia service. By codifying an individual right of self-defense, the Second Amendment in no way authorizes armed rebellion against a Federal government subjectively perceived by some to have become tyrannical.
> 
> Indeed, the Second Amendment doesnt trump the First Amendment, citizens first and foremost have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances, to seek relief from government excess through the ballot box or the Federal courts, where citizens are not authorized to take it upon themselves to take up arms against the Federal government without the consent of a majority of all the people of the Nation; to do so without the consent of the majority of the American people would be an act of treason and rebellion, not an act of restoration.



I agree with what I think you are saying, that even the militia is supposed to be "well regulated" the point being to enforce the Constitution not mayhem. So if you are saying the govt is not following the Constitution and due process, then the enforcers taking up arms would have to be upholding that authority in order to correct the ones out of line. And to have the authority would mean to be enforcing the Constitution and protecting due process that the govt is failing to do. you cannot violate the laws you are trying to enforce.

it should be orderly as possible.

only if the govt attacks without due process and then you defend yourself using arms, then it becomes a self-defense argument as to why you didn't have time to apply due process.

but this does not justify a preemptive strike where you start making war and attacks against govt without first seeking diplomatic redress of grievances. when petitions and due process are pursued orderly in the spirit of natural laws and the Constitution, this carries the weight of the people or the consent of the governed from which govt derives its authority. so such processes tend to go through successfully.

if you approach the process with political division that does not represent the whole of the people or the public, that is why it fails. it is just more political bullying by one group against another. unfortunately that is what we have going on now, even in Congress and through the President's office pushing onesided agenda that doesn't respresent the public.

to be fair, to be inclusive, I will also say that as many people felt that Bush was abusing his office to push policies that didn't represent a large number of taxpaying dissenters either.

in order to correct this, to DEFEND the Constitution, the authority of the public must be invoked and not partisan forces on one side vs another.

I think it would be easier to see the proper enforcement and application of the Second Amendment when you remove the partisan agenda.

You are both right that people defend and interpret the Second Amendment for different reasons and contexts that matter to them.

the true meaning is the right of defense, and for me believing in conflict resolution FIRST to avoid the need for armed threats of force as a security measure, I even interpret part of the Second Amendment as the right to legal defense as well for other people who do not use arms but use other means of "enforcing the Constitution" we shouldn't have to resort to arms to defend our rights, or resort to lawsuits, but should be able to enforce the laws without competing with bigger guns or meaner lawyers which is no guarantee.

so I take the right of defense much further than just the arms specifically stated

I believe the well regulated militia refers to enforcement of Constitutional laws and principles in general, and anyone has the right to defend these with or without force.

in the case of arms, I believe it is the duty and responsibility to enforce the Constitution as a condition of bearing those arms. so if everyone agreed to those terms, that would cover all the other cases of defending one's will, consent and right of defense in any conflict.

there would be no need to argue over each and every application this law applies to.


----------



## emilynghiem (Jan 15, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



and murders are not CAUSED by the firearms but by the people

most murders can be prevented by managing personal issues directly

by addressing the anger, abuse, conflict or other issues that precipitated the murder

much of this requires personal counseling that is OUTSIDE govt jurisidiction

if this is not done, then you can argue in circles about guns "after the fact"
and never solve the real problems behind crimes, abuse, violence and murder.

if you want to address the causes of murder (and drug addiction, criminal illness, and relationship abuse that most often lead up to acts of violence or murder)

why not focus on the level of "health and safety codes" BEFORE these issues become matters of civil or criminal violations forced into government hands?

better screening and earlier intervention on the level of "health and safety" would localize the decision and process to the people or the states, and keep these issues out of the federal level that is supposed to handle national security military and defense for the whole nation

these issues of local safety and public health are better addressed per person and per community to catch and resolve the issues internally which govt is not designed for.

since all states are facing political issues of health care reform, it makes sense to reform the criminal justice system that overlaps with public health. we should re-examine what we are spending on health care that isn't diagnosing or curing addiction or criminal illness, and invest in programs and methods that do work. by reducing crime and the costs related, especially early diagnosis of criminal illness and addiction to reduce murder and the exorbitant costs of capital crime and punishment, we could pay for health care instead.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Google "straw purchases" dumbass.


----------



## Slacker (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Right, a culture of "gun fetishism" doesn't cause violence.  Given that society's fascination with violence, it causes* gun* violence specifically.



Yes, our culture of violence, in movies, TV, video games, and how we raise our kids (boys specifically), does desensitize us to violence but there is debate on whether it causes people to be violent. A "gun fetish" does not lead to violence though. The best estimates for gun ownership are about 45% or 52 million of American households owning 260 million guns. If that's what you consider a fetish and that the "gun fetish" causes the violence, then we'd be seeing a hell of a lot more "gun violence" than we do now. I don't consider gang (gun) violence, suicide, accidental shootings, etc. to fall into the category that concerns people the most which is the senseless killings. Like the topic of this thread.The factors that determine our behavior and whether a person is at risk for developing violent tendencies include biological traits, family bonding, individual characteristics, intelligence and education, child development, peer relationships, cultural shaping and resiliency.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



I find that people on the left tend to have an unreasonable fear of being in the proximity of guns.


----------



## DoItMyself (Jan 15, 2014)

Redfish said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > We are just lucky to have guns keeping us safe
> ...



If we are safe from govt, then why are so many people in a rage the last few years about all the harm the government could do to us?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Which shows that the gun laws are way too lax. From wiki: "Straw purchases made outside of federally regulated dealerships are not illegal unless the gun is used in a crime with the prior knowledge of the straw purchaser. "
Too many loopholes and lousy laws to start with.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

The downside of carrying a firearm:

You have to clean the gun more often.
The pretty copper jacket gets tarnished.
My keys scratch the finish.
Whenever I have to loosen my belt, I also have to loosen my holster.

Yeah that's all the downside I can think of.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> The downside of carrying a firearm:
> 
> You have to clean the gun more often.
> The pretty copper jacket gets tarnished.
> ...



The upside is that you will always have a chance to eat your gun every year the Preds don't come close to winning the Cup. Which is well... Every year.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



Finally -- we agree.  It *is* the people, our culture and our history.  That's why I keep saying focusing on gun restriction laws is trying to treat the symptom while ignoring the disease.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 2/3 of all MURDERS are caused by guns
> ...



The tool is an issue when you have one tool that makes it infinitely easier than all the other tools.  Again, try to pick somebody off from a tower using a baseball bat.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

TemplarKormac said:


> Your argument is invalid.



Your cartoon is a strawman.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



Bull shit


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > LeadRoundNose said:
> ...



Like I said, I think.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Politico said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



You want to disarm cops, because, as far as I know, the only person who ever got shot over his kids throwing popcorn was shot by a cop.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> > Your argument is invalid.
> ...



People without guns never kill anyone, right?


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts
> ...



31,076 Americans won the lottery twice last year?


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > It seems only fair to tell you that I do not have a clue as to what you are talking about in Los Angeles.
> ...



Frankly, having lived in New Orleans, I don't find either one of these POVs rational at all.  It isn't a war zone and there's no need to walk around packing.

And by the way folks it's "*As* I said" -- not "like I said".


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Redfish said:


> So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> 
> Should we ban cars when a mental case drives into a crowd?


You might have a point, but were cars designed as deadly weapons?  Seems 'deadly weapon' was the prime directive when designing a gun.


----------



## racewright (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



What other countries murder rate is  of no use in comparing gun ownership.
This is a country that believes in freedom plane and simple....I for one am tired of having more and more restriction placed on me because of the bad guy.

I have been yelling at my 30-30 (not really) all morning to go and shoot the neighbors dog and it just will not listen to me.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Is that like your claim that the US has a murder rate 3 times any industrialized country?


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > When someone gets shot, they say they died by gunshot, not by human being. Therefore, ipso facto, if the cause of death was by gunshot, guns kill people.
> ...



Yeah yeah, "guns don't kill people, bullets kill people"...

"Bullets don't kill people, the force of their action kills people"....

"The force of bullets doesn't kill people, the loss of blood from the damage kills people"...

Ad infinitum; what's the point?


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

racewright said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



I've made no mention of murder "rates", either in this post or anywhere in the thread.

Perhaps you should quit yelling and take reading lessons.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> When someone gets shot, they say they died by gunshot, not by human being. Therefore, ipso facto, if the cause of death was by gunshot, guns kill people.



Actually, they die when their brain stops working. I guess that means I can kill you by thinking about it.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> The irrational outrage and illogical posts from lefties here is a result of getting beaten numerous times by the NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and rational courts numerous times. It funny to read the abject stupidity that this butthurt has brought them to.



Refill your popcorn, 'cuz here's a rerun of that irrational outrage and illogical posts:



Lonestar_logic said:


> Do you live in the US?
> If not, then why the fuck do you even care?
> If so, then when are you leaving?





007 said:


> your COMMIE LEFTIST ANTI CONSTITUTION BULL SHIT isn't going to hold water here...
> It is you CONSTITUTION HATING, RADICAL, COMMIE LEFTARDS that think everyone should be disarmed that are the minority.
> Fuck off, COMMIE.





TakeAStepBack said:


> Most are for self defense, you ignorant shit stain on society. ... But to a moron, there is no difference between the initiation of violence and defending oneself.
> 
> Because you can not fix stupid. You just can not.





chikenwing said:


> Given the fact that you have zero understanding of what living in America is like maybe you ought to keep your idiotic opinions to yourself....
> You're a LIB-pussy waste of bandwidth.





Wildman said:


> were you born stupid or when you realized you were a liberal ??





Lonestar_logic said:


> I'm glad you're no longer living in the US, we have enough ignorant people here already.





dannyboys said:


> These LIB-pussy-men-who-pee-sitting-down are fools. Whenever they are in any sort of harms way who do they run to crying like the babies they are?





PredFan said:


> Oh, thanks for offering yourself up as an example of the stupidity I was talking about.



Damn that liburrul butthurt.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You can say that about any weapon including fists and feet.

The least common denominator in all murders is the person doing the killing.

People kill people

People have always killed people
People will always kill people.
It is human nature for people to kill other people.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Peterf said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



Nobody in Sweden owns a handgun? Or should I just assume that you don't know anyone who is an officer in the army, a military police officer, a medic, or a postal worker, all of whom are issued 9mm SIG P220s?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Of all gun murders in 2010 and 2011 80% were committed by gangs in major urban areas.

So tell me again how most gun murders are domestic violence.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Cops have a mindset that everyone is an enemy? Doesn't that say more about the cops than the people who have a gun?

In my experience it is the cops that think they have special privileges, an attitude that takes time to mature, not the inexperienced ones that are more likely to over react simply because someone knows the law better than they do.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > The downside of carrying a firearm:
> ...



Actually dumbass, the Orlando Predators (we had the name first btw), have won the Arena Bowl twice and been in the championship game five times. So suicide has never been a consideration.

You are a loser.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



in 2011, per the FBI:

8583 murders were committed with firearms
4081 murders were committed without

Almost half as many are committed without firearms..a pretty significant percentage.

728 were committed with hands and feet. 

FBI ? Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



The point is that you are placing the blame on an inanimate object and ignoring the real problem. I'm surprised quite frankly, that you aren't smart enough to figure that out.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



Two thirds of all homicides are committed by firearms. Not knives, not baseball bats, not hands and feet....guns


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > The irrational outrage and illogical posts from lefties here is a result of getting beaten numerous times by the NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and rational courts numerous times. It funny to read the abject stupidity that this butthurt has brought them to.
> ...



Reading comprehension not your strong suit?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



And I'll say it again

According to the CDC 80% of those gun murders are gang related and most likely perpetrated by criminals with illegally obtained guns.

So tell me how does placing restrictions on law abiding gun owners put a dent in that 80%?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



And 80% of that 2/3 are committed by gangs in major metropolitan areas.

Maybe you should concentrate your concern in those places and leave law abiding people alone.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



ZERO are committed by firearms.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



It doesn't in any way.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 15, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Sounds like a win-win to me.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



What, exactly, do you propose to do about gun violence? Wave a magic wand and make it go away? In other words, until you have a proposal that actually does something about the problem, stop screaming about the fact that the sky is blue.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Exactly.

This is not a gun ownership problem when 80% of gun murders are most likely committed with illegally obtained weapons and confined to an extremely small population in a few cities.

It's a problem with our cities


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



*What part of "no more valid" don't you get?*

.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



We have 4 times the guns per capita, but only 3 times the murder rate?

Obviously, guns aren't the problem.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> What, exactly, do you propose to do about gun violence?



Severely punish gun crimes.

*Commit a crime with a gun = life in prison
Commit a crime with a gun and take a life = public execution.*

Full due process followed with certain and swift penalty.

Gun crime will drop.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Lying again?

frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



No shit, Sherlock.  That's why I said the original premise that "guns kill people", is a strawman.  Nobody says inanimate objects act by themselves.  This is a distraction tool to evade the issue.  And it's fucking stupid.  Ergo the satire.  Or was that over your head too?


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Vandalshandle said:
> ...



It would be "As I Said" ... If I had related exactly what I said ... I didn't say the same thing and paraphrased so therefor it was "Like I said" ... Correct yourself.

.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

All sense of perspective and reason are gone from this argument.

Put in perspective outside of gang related murders there are only about 2500 gun murders in this country annually.

in a country of nearly 350 million that's hardly a blip.

And it puts murders by firearms on par with murders by knives, blunt objects and hands and feet.

It is the violence confined to an extremely small segment of the population in isolated cities that skews the stats.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



I love it when stupid people say stupid things about other stupid people.

Guns kill people, in one chilling graph


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Is editing out inconvenient content and replacing it with blank lines yours?

You work for the Ministry of Truth, Comrade?  Are those "unposts" that never happened now?


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...


Guns don't die.  People die.

Why can't gun lovers see a correlation between guns and gun violence?


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Perfect example.  Desperately trying to hang his hat on semantics so as to avoid at all costs the actual issue.  Cheap rhetorical bullshit tactic employed by those bereft of argumentative basis.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Why can't gun lovers see a correlation between guns and gun violence?



The correlation is the criminal willful act.


----------



## Vox (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 31,076 Americans won the lottery twice last year?



stop lying. 18K of those were suicides - they do not count.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



You're, like, quite a dancer  

I put that there because I know you're literate and would know what I was talking about.  Quantum Dickbag made the same grammatical error but he can't read and would never admit he fucked up anyway.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Why can't gun lovers see a correlation between guns and gun violence?
> ...


The correlation is immediacy.  A handy gun, a heated situation equals murder.  A heated situation and a bat, a car, a fist equals a hospital stay at worst.  But usually not a murder.  Why?  Because the gun is a deadly weapon that can be used without physical contact with the victim.

How many dead Floridians would there be in that movie theater if the assailant was armed with nothing but his fists?


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



What's the difference in you desperately trying to ignore the obvious in attempts to make the counterpoint?
You are an expert at this rhetoric ... But yours is the same argumentative bullshit.

.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

Vox said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 31,076 Americans won the lottery twice last year?
> ...


18,000 deaths by gun suicide in one year?


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Again you ignore the reasons why someone would kill someone else over this just to push an agenda.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...


Your link is excellent, it gives a lot of good reasons why criminals have guns. A straw purchase, when someone legally buys a gun to give to someone else, means either the laws are too lax on the sale of guns, or we don't hold the people making the straw purchase responsible for his gun that he just bought. Or both.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Exactly.  How many kids would Adam Lanza have gotten to without that technology?  How many would Jared Loughner have killed?  Charles Whitman?  John Muhammad?  James Holmes?  Harris and Klebold?  Etc etc etc...  Immediacy is exactly the issue.  As was said about Jovan Belcher, if he hadn't had ready access to a firearm, he and his wife and daughter would probably be alive today.

This ain't rocket surgery.  But you know what, that's inconvenient, let's go back to subjects and verbs and pretend the indirect object is the villain.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



I'm not *making *a point there.  I'm shooting one down. 

Yours,
Captain Obvious


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


I'm not ignoring the fact that Florida hired and retired a police officer with serious mental issues.  Furthermore, I do not ignore the efforts of the gun lobby to stop thorough, vigorous background checks.  I wonder how many gun lovers would like to do away with all background checks because they find them inconvenient at best, or an affront to their rights at worst?  All the while we have senseless, preventable shootings.  A genuine public safety threat.

Why anyone would take a gun to a theater is beyond me.  From John Wilkes booth to the current idiot cop in Tampa, has a gun in a theater ever proven to be a useful item?  It seems every time guns are introduced, tragedy follows.  

Before the advent of cheap handguns in the mid 1970s (remember the debate over "Saturday Night Specials"?) our society has been hobbled with gun toting idiots.  And the solution proffered by the gun lobby?  Why more guns and guns for everyone!  It's like putting gasoline in fire extinguishers.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Yeah, how many people would Ted Kazynski, Ted Bundy, Jeffry Dahmer, and John Wayne Gacy have killed if they didn't have a gun? Oh right, they didn't.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Yes you are in fact pointing solely at guns and ignoring the reasons for these acts of violence. You may not care to admit it but that is exactly what you are doing.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> How many dead Floridians would there be in that movie theater if the assailant was armed with nothing but his fists?



4058 were killed by hands and feet since 2007 per the FBI.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



What do you do, specialize in stupid fallacies?  A discussion of gun violence is not a discussion of mail bombers, poisoners, butchers or freaking car drivers.  Going for the Guinness Book of World Records on red herrings now, are we?

How long could I survive if I ate only rocks?  Oh right, I can't.  That proves nutrition is bullshit.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...


Do you really think that the crimes committed by your rogues gallery are really similar to the majority of gun deaths?  Do you think that the actions taken by those on your list are relatable to the Tampa shooting or the Roswell shooting or the various Colorado shootings?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



I do see a correlation, I also know that correlation is not causation. I still see a causal connection  between violence and large government policies. I might be wrong about it, bit no one is even addressing it.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...


Because gun violence is caused by the presence of guns.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



The assailant is a cop. Until you are willing to disarm cops you don't have a leg to stand on.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > How many dead Floridians would there be in that movie theater if the assailant was armed with nothing but his fists?
> ...


Are guns a factor in gun violence?  The smoke screen set up by gun lovers is tiresome and rhetorically inept.  And therefore ineffective.  Guns plus a heated situation equals a coroner's inquest.  Sure people will continue to kill each other with any means necessary.  But the next time I'm washing my hands or feet, I'll check first to make sure they are not loaded.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Ultimately, they boil down to the government not enforcing the laws that already exist.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


The assailant was an insane cop.  What's in his service record?  What history of violence did he carry into that theater along with his handgun?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Yeah, if only the 9/11 terrorists hadn't had guns they wouldn't have been able to kill all those people.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



What's the matter with you? Brain not functioning well today? I mentioned killers who didn't use guns to show how your argument was invalid. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean it isn't correct.

Nobody is buying your bull shit.


----------



## Vox (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



somebody give some water to this fake American - he /she is choking.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> And the solution proffered by the gun lobby?  Why more guns and guns for everyone!  It's like putting gasoline in fire extinguishers.




Not really.

NRA pushed for NCIS and the expansion of NCIS.

*



			The NRA, long considered a feared and powerful gun-rights lobby, allied itself with the most ardent anti-gun-rights forces in the House to quickly push through a bill that would massively increase the NICS Index -- the database of people who cannot pass an FBI background check for purchase of a firearm.
		
Click to expand...

*
NICS Improvement Details


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



You are calling him an insane cop now, after the fact. What proof do you have that he didn't have a stellar record as an officer?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



The NRA supports background checks. Ask Obama if you don't want to believe me.

The rest of your post makes as much sense as your claim that the "gun lobby" opposes background checks.


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



In generating a response demonstrating an emphasis in contrast to the same applicable argument ... You did in fact make a counterpoint, whether or not you intended to ... And I did identify it as a counterpoint ... not a point.

.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



That explains all the shootings at gun shows.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



NRA and Congress Consider Tougher Background Checks for Gun Buys | Threat Level | Wired.com

NRA and Congress Consider Tougher Background Checks for Gun Buys

*



			In the wake of the deadliest shooting tragedy in American history, the National Rifle Association and top Democrats have opened a dialogue about how to beef up the database that gun vendors use to check a potential buyers criminal and mental health background. Even though law enforcement and mental health authorities knew about the disturbed state of Virgina Tech shooter Cho Seung Hui two years before Mondays massacre, Cho easily purchased two handguns in Virginia, a state with historically lax gun laws.
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...


There was a shooting at a gun shop here in Pennsylvania just last week.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> The rest of your post makes as much sense as your claim that the "gun lobby" opposes background checks.



But its okay to lie or make claims not know what your talking about it *if it feels really right.*


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



He was a captain and a member of SWAT. That means that, in addition to the extensive background and psych tests he went through to be a cop, he had to pass through extra screening, and receive additional training, to handle all sorts of different situations that are not in the purview of a beat cop. I guess they forgot to cover parents with cell phones.

Keep arguing with me, the more you argue, the better my case.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Absolutely none.

Me, I can point to the fact that he was a SWAT captain if I want to make my point, which is that police resort to lethal force way too often, but all Nosmo has is a lame attempt to blame the gun he used.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



And that proves me right, doesn't it?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

After due process execute the cop and broadcast it in theatres across the nation as a PSA.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Vox said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Suicide is not a violent crime.

BTW  women find men who use emoticons less attractive than those who don't


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The point you're missing is that far from all homicides are murder. Justifiable homicides include those that stop a murder (self defense or defense of others).


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Great point.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



the dispatcher certainly did appear more professional and knowledgeable then the officer 

the kid had to set the officer  straight every step of the way 

including when the officer told him to reload his firearm after he left 

the kid said he could not do that because then he would be brandishing a firearm


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



*I wasn't able to see the video for some reason it never came up on the link provided but I'm wondering how much experience this officer had*.

the blaze has a video of the incident  but not the 911 call


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


That's precisely what I want to know.  Does he have a history of violence?  We're talking about Tampa Florida here.  Not considered the Athens of the Fulf Coast.  How could someone capable of such bad decision making be trusted as a police officer?


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


Are you trying to justify the shooting?  A SWAT team member is faced down with a cell phone and movie theater popcorn and then he makes the choice to draw and fire?!?  And somehow this all makes sense?


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


Hardly!  It was an armed assault on the clerk at a gun shop.  The favored example of gun lovers.  The presence of guns escalates the chances of gun violence.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



I understand that words had different meanings back then, but when they said "all enemies, foreign or domestic", if they meant redcoats and Indians why didn't they save ink?


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



No, it's called satire; taking the adversary's point to its obviously absurd conclusion in order to demonstrate that absurdity.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

There is no downside to carrying a weapon.


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



It doesn't matter if you used satire when you made your counterpoint ... And intention is irrelevant to definition in that case.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



* Does he have a history of violence*

apparently not according to neighbors

the police report he says he was hit in the face 

this is why they have trials 

Ex-cop arrested in fatal theater shooting 'nice guy,' neighbor says - CNN.com


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



They all appeared to be textbook perfect ... Including the dispatch of officers to the scene and how they approached the situation.
Right up to the point the responding officer got out of his vehicle, drew his weapon and went all "SWAT Team" on the guy.

It was also interesting when the dispatcher told the woman on the phone that more people were choosing to open carry as a result of Sandy Hook.

I don't see any of this working out with legal gun owners as long as owning a firearm makes you a villain in general perception.
It is going to get worse before it gets any better ... And the people who think they are helping someone are the people who are going to make it worse.

.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> The presence of guns escalates the chances of gun violence.



The presence of guns also stops gun violence.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> There is no downside to carrying a weapon.



You are either lying or have failed to think out your post.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



I am not the one that defends cops who shoot random citizens, am I? 

The point I am making is that, until you are willing to apply the exact same laws to cops that you want to hoist on me, don't expect me to  discuss this like you are being rational. This asshole would have had a gun even if it was illegal for everyone who isn't a cop. The evidence, at this point, shows he wasn't a violent cop, or a bad cop, he was just a cop. You can't change the facts because you don't like the fact that a cop, who you would support under almost any other circumstance, shot a guy for texting during the previews. Last time I was in a movie they didn't even ask people to turn their cell phones off until after the previews, yet he died for it because a cop decided it was a capital offense.


----------



## 007 (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > There is no downside to carrying a weapon.
> ...



True. The obvious downside is you don't know how to use it.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



The only "counterpoint" was that the strawman argument is absurd.  But that's always the  point of satire.

Had I actually intended to float the proposition that "guns don't kill people, bullets kill people" as if it could be a productive argument, *that *would have been a counterpoint.  It wasn't.


----------



## 007 (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > The presence of guns escalates the chances of gun violence.
> ...



The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.

And the bad guys will always have a gun, so why shouldn't the good guys?

I don't need a cop to protect me as long as I have a gun.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

007 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



No, I own a gun.  But I'm too responsible to carry it around and make it available to any idiot who sees it.  It's at home, unloaded and locked in a safe. I know responsibility.


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



You are going to have to try harder.
Counterpoint doesn't refer to your intentions and you achieved the criteria to meet the definition ... Just more argumentative bullshit "like" I mentioned in the post your are still talking about.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



*It was also interesting when the dispatcher told the woman on the phone that more people were choosing to open carry as a result of Sandy Hook*

yeah i found that curious as well 

i knew sales skyrocketed after Sandy Hook but was unaware that open carry increased 

maybe it is related to what the kid said to the cop when the cop asked him why 

he was open carrying 

he said because he is trying to get a CC permit but the process is slow 

maybe the state is dragging its feet on a lot of permit apps

and this is why they are seeing much more open carry


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

007 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...


tell it to Reagan or Kennedy or McKinley or anyone else who was shot while they were surrounded by well armed, well trained cadres of security forces.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Yes just let me unlock my safe, retrieve my ammo, load my gun, charge my weapon and take action.

What's that honey ?  Hurry they're raping you.

Just being responsible dear


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > There is no downside to carrying a weapon.
> ...



My other post listing the downsides was a joke. I thought that was obvious. There is no downside.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



If that was true you would be able to post hundreds of stories, yet all you have is one of a guy getting shot in a gun store that he operated out of his own home.

What was that again? It was private home in rural Pennsylvania, not a gun store in a big city, or a gun show? And the guy was pretending to be a cop investigating an illegal lottery, and extorting the owner of the store that he operated out of his house?

Damn, I guess you win after all.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



He was hit in the face with a bag of popcorn.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



I own a gun, several in fact. I carry almost all the time. Its fully loaded and the safety is off. I know responsibility.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



The gun control crowd is by definition, unintelligent.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...



personally i am glad he knows his limits 

he says right out that a bad guy would simply disarm him anyhow


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> *It was also interesting when the dispatcher told the woman on the phone that more people were choosing to open carry as a result of Sandy Hook*
> 
> yeah i found that curious as well
> 
> ...



Well ... We don't know for sure if that is the result of any kind of study.
Perhaps the dispatcher was trying to put the caller at ease in reference to encountering someone with a holstered firearm in a open carry situation.
Maybe more instances of people calling the police regarding open carry after Sandy Hook would result in someone thinking it was a greater occurrence as far as the act of open carry.

It is hard to say what the actual case is ... We can only speculate, which is why I thought it was interesting. 
I don't know what it is like elsewhere ... But open carry is not uncommon outside of urban around here.
I mean not everyone is packing around a firearm ... But enough to make it less than highly unusual.

If you are going to the woods, getting out on the bayou or messing around on the back 40 ... There is a chance you may need to take care of a shag-nasty critter that has no desire whatsoever to debate.

.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > BlackSand said:
> ...



I only "achieved" that by virtue of your misinference.  That's your action --not mine. 

And yes, as the writer of the post my intention is crucial.  Who else's intention matters?


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...


Are you mocking my responsibility?  Do you think I should act less responsibly?  


And why should I listen to you?


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...


Oh!  Obviously justifiable homocide!  Who could blame him for gunning down someone armed with a handful of popcorn!


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...


What kind. Of thinking includes: I'm off to the movies!  Better take my gun!


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...




Yes I am mocking your misplaced over-responsibility.

When you NEED a gun you NEED it now.

You can be responsible and protect yours with a gun.

Do not listen to me. Do not listen to anyone. Rest assured that you know everything.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



we dont know the facts yet 

he also said he feared for his life


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



there is no law against it 

but in your case it is best you leave it home


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> What kind. Of thinking includes: I'm off to the movies!  Better take my gun!



The kind that places a premium on self-defense.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Answer: "paranoid".  The same as that nutjob 2ndAmendment who actually took to this forum to whine that his bank won't let him in there armed.

Yeah, you read that right -- a *bank*.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


I do not respect anyone calling for less responsibility when owning and storing a gun in the home.  I take great offense with your comments.  I am a responsible adult and I take that responsibility seriously.

No wonder the gun lovers think so irrationally!  They do not take responsibility and mock those who do.  You have lost all credibility win me.  Go to Hell, sir!


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



*Yeah, you read that right -- a bank.  [/QUOTE]*

my bank dont care


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Yes. You have to be paranoid to think you could be gunned down in movie theater.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


Facing a cell phone and movie popcorn?  Yeah.  Right.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

My bank doesn't know.

Just like you don't know when we are sitting there with our kids watching a matinee that I have a Glock in pocket.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



that is why they have trials 

the courtroom was packed with folks there supporting the shooter


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Right. That is why you must say I call for less responsibility instead of *over, misplaced responsibility.*

And you have to ignore that I posted *you can responsibly own a gun, have instant access to protect yours when you need it.*

I love making your type spin like this like a fat kid loves cake.


----------



## Warrior102 (Jan 15, 2014)

Dutch said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



And 40,000 still die in car crashes every year, anus


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Dutch said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...



Let me clear one point of order for you dutchie old boy
One is a privilege
The other is a right
neither is interchangeable nor should one be confused with the other.
I bet you think faggots have a right to marriage, don't you dutchie old boy?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

One more point of order that must be addressed since it keeps being brought back into these types of discussion
A license is a privilege granted by the state.
Tradesman  license, marriage license, motor vehicle license are all privilege's granted by the state

A right does not need a license to obtain said right.
Firearm ownership is a right the second amendment dictates that we Americans have that right and directs the federal government to insure that right is protected. Now we have allowed that right to become fuzzy and have allowed the federal and state governments to keep that right from us. I say no more compromises. You gun grabbers have made your last gun control law.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 15, 2014)

The NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and voters have delivered a major butt-whipping to the gun grabbing morons on the left over the past year or so. They are so intensely burned by it that they have become even MORE irrational than they usually are.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> The NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and voters have delivered a major butt-whipping to the gun grabbing morons on the left over the past year or so.



BigReb, you gonna let him get away with this? 

He says the "gun grabbers" have been majorly buttwhipped, you said "we have allowed that right to become fuzzy and have allowed the federal and state governments to keep that right from us. I say no more compromises. You gun grabbers have made your last gun control law."

So which is it?  Have we allowed "gun grabber" laws, or have those attempts been buttwhipped?  I think you and he should fight this out.

Doesn't matter to me, I just want the entertainment.

Squirm dance! Squirm dance!


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> One more point of order that must be addressed since it keeps being brought back into these types of discussion
> A license is a privilege granted by the state.
> Tradesman  license, marriage license, motor vehicle license are all privilege's granted by the state
> 
> ...



Should private citizens have the right to own and bear any arm available to the military?  Should private citizens own RPGs, armored tanks, nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons?  Is the right to bear arms unlimited and universal?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > One more point of order that must be addressed since it keeps being brought back into these types of discussion
> ...



It would have to be unlimited, or else your militia isn't well-armed. Nukes would be a must.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 15, 2014)

PredFan said:


> The NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and voters have delivered a major butt-whipping to the gun grabbing morons on the left over the past year or so. They are so intensely burned by it that they have become even MORE irrational than they usually are.



Most gun owners don't have all their own teeth. Look it up.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Absolutely.

I think the Pentagon should be pubic-access.  Like a library.  You sign up for a card, borrow a drone or a tank or a nuke.  Why not?  We paid for all that shit, right?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > One more point of order that must be addressed since it keeps being brought back into these types of discussion
> ...


According to miller vs U.S. yes.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Just think, if three criminals showed up at your door, you are responsible enough not to shoot any of them in the groin.



> Muchanic knocked on Braman's door wearing a ski mask. The victim  opened his door carrying a loaded 357 Smith and Wesson revolver.  Muchanic told Braman he was having car problems and needed to use his  phone, according to state police.
> Trooper Mark Mulvey said Braman tried to close the door when  he realized Muchanic was wearing a ski mask. State police said Muchanic  then forced his way into the home and began assaulting Braman and  knocking him to the ground.
> Braman fired three shots at Muchanic and hit him once in the groin.
> Troopers say Muchanic fled the home, falling to the ground. The two other men, Brewer and Hess left Muchanic at the scene.



Home invasion victim shoots suspect after assault | WBNG-TV: News, Sports and Weather Binghamton, New York | Local


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



The kind that says cops always carry their guns.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > The NRA, the 2nd Amendment, and voters have delivered a major butt-whipping to the gun grabbing morons on the left over the past year or so.
> ...



He hasn't contradicted what I said. Gun owners are taking back our rights, that once were misinterpreted


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...


What happens when those weapons fall into the hands of Al Qeada?  The next Ted Kazinski?  The street gangs?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Miller vs. U.S. 1938 and Lewis vs U.S. 1980 affirming what Miller ruled upon
*Opinion of the Court*
In order for a firearm too be protected by the second amendment it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.
United States v. Miller


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Of course he did, how else could he justify shooting a guy with a cell phone?


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


There is a greater statistical chance that someone in my household gets shot from an irresponsibly stored gun than I am ever suddenly called upon to be Dirty Harry.  I'm sorry, but I have to face reality, not a screenplay.  I have to be a responsible adult, not some moron with a Rambo complex.  I have to act intelligently and responsibly, not like a wannabe John Wayne.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Ah so he isn't contradicting you; you're contradicting yourself.

Thanks for clearing that up.  I really wanted a firefight though.  Shoot.  Uh, I mean, shit.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Miller vs. U.S. 1938 and Lewis vs U.S. 1980 affirming what Miller ruled upon
> *Opinion of the Court*
> In order for a firearm too be protected by the second amendment it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.
> United States v. Miller


"well regulated" or the guys whose trailer is in the next lot?


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



It was satirical. I'm taking the idea to where it wants to go.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



A cop had cops supporting him?

By the way, did you catch the fact that the judge denied bail, and said that murder charges were warranted?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > One more point of order that must be addressed since it keeps being brought back into these types of discussion
> ...



You think we should arrest anyone who has biological weapons in their possession? Does that prohibition extend to e coli and H1N1, or are you going to pick and choose which weapons people can, and cannot, legally transport based on your personal paranoia?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Anyone with a basic understanding of physics can build a nuclear weapon, the only hard part is getting the proper materials to make it go boom.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Miller vs. U.S. 1938 and Lewis vs U.S. 1980 affirming what Miller ruled upon
> ...



Care to go back?
Want to address these words?
*reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of*
Which means the courts was using the correct definition from the time those two words were used.
As to be expect and in working order. Not government regulated.

If that were the case thew second amendment would read as follows
A  militia well regulated by congress being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



What happened in the 1960s and 1970s when airplane hijackings were routine?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



That is an lie, you should stop being afraid of lies.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


i know that and you know that, but there are folks here who mocked my responsibility as a gun owner and want to open every military arsenal to the general public.

Imagine, they advocate less personal responsibility as to gun ownership, wish they had grenade launchers and can't see any connection between guns and gun violence!  Sometimes, Pogo, I think I'm arguing with fourteen year old boys who just came out of a Die Hard movie.  It's a wonder a rogue cop didn't shoot them for giggling too loudly.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



There you go again with the non comprehension thing again.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



You have a better chance of winning the lottery twice than getting shot once with your own firearm.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...


No, the kind that thinks he can be Dirty Harry or any rogue vigilante and never mind the consequences.  In other words, immature and irresponsible.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



In other words the kind of vicarious fantasy addiction that drives them to think they actually ARE the character on the movie screen.  Like the way Mark Chapman thought he was John Lennon.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...


I'll take my chances by unloading and locking my gun in a safe.  That's what real responsible adults do.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



That's your choice, you do not get to make that choice for me.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Lets get this argument on the parameters that matter, the guy that did this was a cop. Every single complain you are making is about people who are not cops, but we are still talking about a cop. Until you get it through your head that we are talking about a cop we aren't discussing anything. I am pointing out that we are talking about cops, and you keep pretending that the problem is people who want to defend themselves from criminals.


----------



## Vandalshandle (Jan 15, 2014)

BlackSand said:


> Vandalshandle said:
> 
> 
> > It seems only fair to tell you that I do not have a clue as to what you are talking about in Los Angeles.
> ...



Sorry, Black, but you simply do not know New Orleans. All you know is the French Quarter, like all the other tourists. You do not have to go to the 9th Ward to get shot dead. The 9th Ward will come to you, because they know that is where the money is, when dealing drugs gets a little too slow. I knew a guy who was shot dead in broad daylight within 25 yards of the front gate to the Jazz festival by a 15 year old who was trying to mug him on a Sunday afternoon. A man was shot dead on my block in Kenner, which is a nice suburb, by a drunk, and I lived within a mile of Ann Rice, in her million dollar masion. Death by gunfire is so pervasive in New Orleans that the drive by shootings can usually be found about half way through section 1 on the Picqaune, not far from normal obituaries and wedding announcments. New Orleans is a perfect example of a civilization that has reverted to a urban jungle, with firearms being the common denominator of the hunters and the hunted, the gangsters, the frightened whites fleeing the city for the country or suburbs,  and the drunks and the addicts.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Cops are gods  don't you get it?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 15, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



He was a SWAT commander. In other words, he was trained to take down that guy on the screen.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



So you're saying, this guy went in to a movie theater packing because he believes the image on the screen is a real guy and he was going to take him down?

That explains a lot in the psychology actually.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


This is an insane cop.  He was a man before he became a cop, and I' m betting he was insane then too.

Are there bad cops?  Are there bad soldiers?  Are there bad priests?

An occupation does not wash away sin.  The shooter was a cop, but now he's a murderer.  There"s no call for deadly force when faced with a cell phone and a bucket of popcorn.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Is that what you will say at the coroner's inquest after the 'accidental shooting' in your trailer?


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


isn't it what Adam Lanza's mother should have done?


----------



## KokomoJojo (Jan 15, 2014)

Redfish said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > We are just lucky to have guns keeping us safe
> ...




what part of government do you think you are safe from because you have a gun?

Now if you said you had the russian arsenal, then I might take a stand back.


----------



## KokomoJojo (Jan 15, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...



Sorry hunny but I didnt receive permission from the state to pull the trigger.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Any shooting done in my home will be intentional. I  have firearms all my life and some are older than you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 15, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Why don't you ask her?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 15, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...



Correct. 

Although our rights are inalienable, they are not absolute; the government is at liberty to place reasonable restrictions on the exercising of our rights, including the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment, provided those restrictions comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence: 



> Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:  For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues.
> 
> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER



Consequently, the issue isnt whether government may place restrictions on gun ownership, as clearly it may, but whether or not proposed restrictions are rationally based, are supported by objective, documented evidence, pursue a proper legislative end, and are therefore indeed Constitutional.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 15, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


if she had been a more responsible parent, a more responsible gun owner, perhaps I could.  But she was not very responsible, was she?

And now she's dead along with 26 innocents.  All because she thought like you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



How in the fuck do you know she wasn't responsible? Were you in the house?


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 16, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



i was not there so i couldnt tell you what transpired 

that led to the shooting

so i will have to wait and see what comes out in the trial 

you seem pretty confident of the facts 

you must have been a witness huh


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 16, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



another factor of proved guilt 

the *denial of bail *

he may be guilty 

again this why we have trials


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



No, I am saying that is what you believe.

The guy was a cop, deal with it.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Tell the family of Kelly Thomas that an occupation doesn't wash away sin. 

The fact is that the government, supported by people like you, routinely makes different rules for itself and for everyone else. Until we deal with that, nothing else is going to matter. We need to restrict the government, and we should seriously consider getting rid of the standing army we call police. Until we do, I am not going to even entertain any notions that the problem is crazy people, or inanimate objects. The problem is the government.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



She did.


----------



## Pogo (Jan 16, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Oh, I see.  So you clicked "quote" on my post only to insert something that had zero to do with my post, simply to serve your endless quest for that fifty thousandth post.

Again.

Lucky me.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



The fact that the government believes my rights are subject to them does not make them right. Until the Supreme Court reinstates the privileges and immunities clause written into the 14th Amendment, which was written with the specific intent of preventing any government in this country from usurping the rights of citizens, you are building your argument on a position that is universally derided as unconstitutional by every legal scholar that does not work for the government in the country.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



The guy worked for the government and shot an unarmed man. Every single witness in the theater says that no physical contact occurred, and the cop is actually in jail. That tells me more than any verdict.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Cops always get bail.

Sticking your head in the sand and claiming that you are being fair only works when you can pretend that no one knows anything more than you. The facts are out there. I am willing to change my opinion if they suddenly discover that the unarmed man had a hidden gun, but they are going to have a hard time manufacturing one this late in the game.

There is evidence out there, look at it. Not forming an opinion just because there hasn't been a trial makes you look like you can't think.

Then again, I don't recall ever accusing you of thinking too much.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 16, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



always --LOL


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



You accused me of thinking that the cop thought the screen came to life. 

I replied that was your how you think.

Want to explain how that has nothing to do with your post? Did the person who explains English to you take a break?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Want to provide all the examples of cops, like the guy who shot the teenager that was being held down by other cops, not getting bail?

Wait, he got bail.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 16, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Judge Denies Bail for Ex-cop Accused of Killing Son - Timothy Allen Davis Sr., 47, faces a first-degree murder charge.

By Jeff Weiner | Orlando Sentinel
Posted 5:05 p.m. EDT, October 7, 2011
Judge Denies Bail for Ex-cop Accused of Killing Son - Attorney Michael LaFay In The News


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 16, 2014)

follow up on Timothy Allen Davis

In-depth case file
Location details: Family home on Kings Eagle Lane in Apopka, Orange County, on Oct. 01, 2011
What happened: Timothy Allen Davis Sr., a former Orlando police officer, shot his 22-year-old son after an altercation in his garage. They were arguing about custody of Davis Jr.'s 3-year-old son, who had been removed from the older Davis' home over his objections. The younger Davis, a high school football star, tackled and punched his father, according to police reports. Davis Sr.'s 9-year-old daughter told police she watched her father walk out of the home, get his gun from his car and shoot her brother. The former detective held his bleeding son in his arms and was apologizing to him when officers arrived. The son objected when police arrested his father, according to reports in the Orlando Sentinel. Davis Jr. died at a hospital.
The outcome: Davis Sr. was charged with murder. At trial he was found not guilty

Stand your ground law, Trayvon Martin and a shocking legacy: Defendant Timothy Allen Davis Sr. and victim Timothy Davis Jr. | Tampa Bay Times


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Wow, one example.

By the way, he was found not guilty.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 16, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...




*By the way, he was found not guilty*

yes but he was denied bail 

a sure sign of his quilt 

now are you saying cops are always found not guilty 

or just rambling 

what more examples look them up yourself


----------



## Politico (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> When someone gets shot, they say they died by gunshot, not by human being. Therefore, ipso facto, if the cause of death was by gunshot, guns kill people.



If that is true then the gun should be the one getting charged.



Defiant1 said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Defend themselves against meanie words? This is why the gun nuts are not taken seriously.


----------



## Peterf (Jan 16, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Peterf said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Two of my nephews are paramedics, one in Stockholm and the other in Uppsala.  Both confirm that gunshot wounds are rare.   Would guys manning ambulances in US cities say the same?


----------



## Peterf (Jan 16, 2014)

Why do some Americans think they are 'safer from the government' if they own guns?   I've not heard that the IRS, for example, only extorts taxes from the gunless.

Imo people are not freer in a US awash with firearms than they are in New Zealand or Denmark or 30 other countries.   The idea that gun-ownership keeps you free is a myth.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Also 80% of all gun murders are due to gang violence not law abiding citizens


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



With guns laws so lax, it's no wonder that the criminals can easily get guns and assault weapons. I think the founding fathers wanted a well-armed militia, not well-armed criminals, didn't they?


----------



## Warrior102 (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> With guns laws so lax, it's no wonder that the criminals can easily get guns and assault weapons. I think the founding fathers wanted a well-armed militia, not well-armed criminals, didn't they?



There are strict drug laws. How do bad guys get crack and heroin, numbnuts?


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 16, 2014)

Warrior102 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > With guns laws so lax, it's no wonder that the criminals can easily get guns and assault weapons. I think the founding fathers wanted a well-armed militia, not well-armed criminals, didn't they?
> ...



With guns


----------



## Warrior102 (Jan 16, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> With guns



How about illegally, with money, numbnuts. 
Probably stolen money, as none of these welfare cases (people of your ilk) have a meaningful job.


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 16, 2014)

Warrior102 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > With guns
> ...



Guns and drugs are inseperable....ask Mexico


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



So keeping law abiding people from owning weapons will make it harder for criminals to get weapons. Here's the thing genius criminals are criminals because they don't obey the law.

I don't give a shit about the militia.  What is so hard for you to understand that a person might want a weapon for self protection from the very criminals that government law enforcement cannot seem to keep off the streets?

Case in point 80% of all gun murders are committed by gangs or in other words criminals.

It skews the numbers to make it seem gun violence is a bigger problem than it is.


----------



## Warrior102 (Jan 16, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Guns and drugs are inseperable....ask Mexico



You're a serious moron. Thank God you're not carrying.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



And what kind of guns do the criminals have? American made, US store bought guns. Try making it a little harder to purchase assault weapons and guns and maybe the criminals wouldn't have so many.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Do you even know what an "assault weapon" is ?

All it is is a semi automatic rifle with some cosmetic doo dads on it and according to the FBI more people are killed by fists and feet than they are by rifles of any kind

And here you go

Harvard Gun Study Claims Banning Weapons Doesn't Decrease Violence



> . *&#8220;There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,&#8221; the authors point out, based on their research*


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


If her assault rifle had been secured properly...


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


So you favor vigilante justice over a police force?


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...




How do you know it wasn't secured properly?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Defiant1 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Because if it was her retarded psycho of a kid would not have been able to get his hands on it.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

Defiant1 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Because her mentally frazzled son shot her and 26 others with it.

Knowing her son was disturbed, she should have taken greater precautions.  Wouldn't that have been the responsible thing to do?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



High gun ownership makes countries less safe, US study finds | World news | theguardian.com


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 16, 2014)

Warrior102 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Guns and drugs are inseperable....ask Mexico
> ...



I carry a Big Stick with a nail in it

The bad guys won't fuck with me


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> i know that and you know that, but there are folks here who mocked my responsibility as a gun owner and want to open every military arsenal to the general public.
> 
> Imagine, they advocate less personal responsibility as to gun ownership, wish they had grenade launchers and can't see any connection between guns and gun violence!  Sometimes, Pogo, I think I'm arguing with fourteen year old boys who just came out of a Die Hard movie.  It's a wonder a rogue cop didn't shoot them for giggling too loudly.



Mocked your misplaced, over-responsibility.

Common usage of arms the individual can bear.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Warrior102 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



If you pulled a big stick with a nail in it on me I would perforate you.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You believe your study I'll believe mine.


Like I said before it's your choice to be defenseless if you are ever the victim of a crime. And I will respect that choice so why can't you respect mine?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



He killed his mother that is when you start failing if he had not killed his mother you could say she didn't lock them up.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You believe your study I'll believe mine. I have been a victim of violent crime maybe you have been lucky enough not to have been.  I was defenseless once I won't be again.  If your luck runs out you can live with your choice


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



He kills her then takes the secured firearms the end.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



They must have been he had to kill her to get them.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



He killed her after he got to them not before.

She was shot remember?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You have a better chance at winning the lottery twice, than getting shot with your gun once.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Comparing Japan to the US is ridiculous and I think I will leave the crime stats to LEO and medical stats to the Dr.'s


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Were you there?


----------



## rightwinger (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Warrior102 said:
> ...



You could get a nasty infection


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I read the reports did you?



> The morning of the shooting, Lanza shot his mother several times in the head with a .22-caliber rifle while she was still in bed.



Newtown Shooting Report Reveals Adam Lanza?s Motive, Shooter Was ?Obsessed? With Columbine Shooting And Plotted Suicide


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



And you lead poisoning.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



OH so she was in the bed? asleep? wasn't like she was up and awake, but asleep. The only way he could get to them was because she was a sleep.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



IF they were secured properly she and only she would have been able to access them.

What is so hard to understand there?

If your car keys were properly secured would  your toddler be able to get them  unlock the car start the car and run you over while you napped in your lawn chair?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...


She was asleep, a person who is asleep cannot stop someone from accessing a locked area and taking what is inside the locked area.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



If he could get into the locked cabinet then it wasn't secure was it?

The whole point of securing weapons is to prevent people from getting them when you are not actively guarding them.

If anyone besides you can get to your weapons when you are not standing in front of your gun safe then your weapons are not properly secured.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



If it's locked isn't it secured? Your argument is flawed. No safe is 100% theft proof


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



You can get close. Certainly close enough so a retard can't get into one.

Cabinets | Gun Safes & Security | Barska Extra Large Biometric Rifle Safe Gun Cabinet, 19-3/4"W x 16"D x 57"H | B978764 - GlobalIndustrial.com

So if said psycho retard wanted to cut off his mother's hand to open the safe she at least would have woken up and could have attempted to stop her kid.

And do you even know if she had a gun safe in the house?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Generally a person doesn't believe their own children will A) steal from them and B) kill them.

I had never had a gun safe when my kids were growing up and if I did they would either knew the combination or knew where to find the key. Reason being, I wanted them to be able to access the firearms in case they needed to protect themselves.

Gun safes are not a requirement to own a gun.


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

So a guy breaks into your house, forces you to the gun cabinet, puts your finger on the pad to open the door, and the guns aren't secure because someone was able to access them.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Mistake number one



> I had never had a gun safe when my kids were growing up and if I did they would either knew the combination or knew where to find the key. Reason being, I wanted them to be able to access the firearms in case they needed to protect themselves.



I take it your kids weren't retards like Lanza.  If they were would you allow them free access to weapons?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> So a guy breaks into your house, forces you to the gun cabinet, puts your finger on the pad to open the door, and the guns aren't secure because someone was able to access them.



Not what happened at the Lanza house. She was not forced to open the gun safe if she even had one was she? No she was shot while she was sleeping.

If a guy breaks into your house and you have weapons wouldn't you shoot him?


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> So a guy breaks into your house, forces you to the gun cabinet, puts your finger on the pad to open the door, and the guns aren't secure because someone was able to access them.



In my house, this is how the events would go down.

So a guy breaks into my house, then he's shot dead by either my 12 ga. or my .45, Police are called, Justice of the Peace pronounces death, end of story.


----------



## hangover (Jan 16, 2014)

Pennywise said:


> The cop only did what millions of us would love to do but are not crazy enough. They should have stopped texting, I guess.
> 
> Look what happens when the entire population thinks they live in a bubble of narcissism. We should outlaw cell phones.



The number of people being killed while driving on cell phones is a lot. But miniscule compared to gun killings.


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Mudflap said:
> 
> 
> > So a guy breaks into your house, forces you to the gun cabinet, puts your finger on the pad to open the door, and the guns aren't secure because someone was able to access them.
> ...



I see you making the argument that it doesn't matter how the weapons were accessed.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Mistake? Explain why it's a mistake to teach children about guns and allow them the freedom to defend themselves with one if the need ever arises.

My kids (all five of them) owned their own firearms as early as the age of nine and their first guns was a 4.10 shotgun followed with their second gun a .22 rifle.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Warrior102 said:
> ...



Suddenly, a new item quickly tops my prayer list.....


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEYjgOFKR1U]How to Dial Open a Combination Safe Lock - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D33T4GOtB-U]Safe Cracking; How to open a Sentry Gun Safe in under 1 minute - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltK-bDbADa8]GUN SAFES "THE TRUTH" weaponseducation - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

There is no downside to carrying a weapon. Unless you are looking at it from the point of view of the would-be rapist/robber/thug.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> There is no downside to carrying a weapon. Unless you are looking at it from the point of view of the would-be rapist/robber/thug.



There is plenty of potential downside.

Many CCW'ers do not have the mindset.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Mudflap said:
> ...



Since we were talking about Lanza I was keeping the argument from moving off on a tangent.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > There is no downside to carrying a weapon. Unless you are looking at it from the point of view of the would-be rapist/robber/thug.
> ...



How many is many?

Very few murders are committed by people who follow all the legal steps to get a carry permit.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > There is no downside to carrying a weapon. Unless you are looking at it from the point of view of the would-be rapist/robber/thug.
> ...



Many, but it is not typical.

CCW holders have a much lower crime conviction rate of any other demographic on the books, except for maybe Amish lesbian paraplegics.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



You are exactly right.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



If your mindset is to take the fight to an armed confrontation or come to the rescue.

Your mindset has fucked you before you ever clear leather.

But gun ownership is an ego game and gun owners know everything.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



I am not talking about CCW's committing illegal acts.


----------



## AquaAthena (Jan 16, 2014)

*"The downside of carrying a firearm.."*

I prefer to look at the upside. You can *find them all *right here:

Why Carry a Gun - Looking at Reasons Why People Carry Concealed Handguns Firearms


*Its a Dangerous World*

If this world wasnt dangerous, we wouldnt have any debate about guns. But it most certainly is, and one must choose whether to live in denial that anything bad can happen, or accept reality and prepare oneself as best you can to protect yourself and your loved ones from whatever threat may arise.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

hangover said:


> Pennywise said:
> 
> 
> > The cop only did what millions of us would love to do but are not crazy enough. They should have stopped texting, I guess.
> ...



Wrong


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...




Wow, lol, that is a bit categorical, is it not?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



OK, but what are you talking about then?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Yes.


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 16, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts
> 
> In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings.  This is the equivalent of more than 85 deaths each day and more than three deaths each hour.1
> 
> ...



stop focusing on guns, start focusing on the problem.   its a cultural thing.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



I'm talking about the vast majority of CCW have a misunderstood command of the civilian defensive firearm.   This is from most often no civilian combative concept training or poor training.  Most gun owners cannot be told or taught anything.


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I don't agree with you, but will admit that I'm pretty much set in my ways. I don't personally know any gun owners who own only one weapon, bought it for "self defense," and don't know how to handle it.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



That is exactly the opposite of my experiences and the facts support me. Police officers are far more likely to engage in unlawful shootings than are CCW holders.

Cops More Likely To Murder? ? LewRockwell.com




> The question arose, how often do police officers commit homicide compared to concealed carry permit holders?   Of the two, which is more common?
> 
> It appears that a person is three times safer with a concealed carry permit holder than they are with a police officer.
> 
> ...



I have had military training and several different weapons courses as a civilian working for different security companies prior to finishing my degree.

Without exception the people that train the students said that the police had the bad apples more often than the civilians. I have heard more stories about stupid cop tricks with guns than anyone else, like a guy in DC at a New Years Eve celebration who, while dancing with his date, pulled his gun out, put it to his head and BAAM the gun went off. They had just converted from use of DA revolvers to Glocks. Bad thing to drink while carrying your gun, but that only applies to civilians apparently.

Then there is the eternally classic...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6s-zU]DEA Agent - YouTube[/ame]

Anyone can make a mistake, no matter how careful. Sometimes you just have a bad day and go on automotor response most of them time.

But the stats show that CCW holders are more careful than cops are, for whatever reason.

Maybe we should disarm our police forces as well?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Handling and shooting your new uber-tactical pew pew you bought is not understanding civilian combative concepts.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



I knew a few back in Texas, where almost every family with a male head of house has at least one gun. For many gun ownership is just something that has come with each generation and there is no military service or CCW training to own. It is just a thing they do and think it natural.

I think they are right, it is totally natural to own a weapon. But training is a good thing they should  get anyway.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



_*If tell you upfront what I am going to ask if bereft of ego on my end can you respond without ego ?*_

What and from whom formal training have you had ?


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 16, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad




Have mixed feelings about this one. On the one hand, if someone's on a mobile device in a theatre it's rude. Wanna tap away get up and go outside. And if someone asks you to put it away, do so, or go outside. Not that hard. So I wouldn't put this as some innocent guy got shot so much as someone who refused to abide by common sense and polite manners got shot. Plus, in a dark theatre, if you're a 71 year old guy facing off some younger guy and suddenly something hits you, overreacting and shooting isn't like in another situation where you can see clearly and don't feel threatened. So the news coverage painting this as some mean cop overreacting isn't giving the real picture of what happened. Seems more like they're using it as another 'let's regulate guns some more' excuse. No regulations or law would have changed this as presumedly, retired law enforcement will always have a weapon on hand if they want one. So using it as a gun control story isn't valid. 

On the other hand, lethal force wasn't justifed. After the popcorn or whatever hits you, and you know you're not injured and the confrontation isn't escalating in force, escalating your defense to include lethal force isn't lawful nor is it justified. Wouldn't say 2nd degree murder though. Manslaughter more like.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

A defensive gun in your home and a defensive gun on your hip in public are not the same animal.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Delta4Embassy said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> ...



Moral: Don't fuck with old men.


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> A defensive gun in your home and a defensive gun on your hip in public are not the same animal.



sure they are.  at least until you can gaurantee me i won't be attacked in either place.  and now that is just the civilian issue.  don't even get me started on the right to protect ourselves from tyranical governments.  which is the real reason citizens need to be armed


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > JimH52 said:
> ...



don't fuck with anyone. stop being an arrogant douche and respect others


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Mudflap said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > A defensive gun in your home and a defensive gun on your hip in public are not the same animal.
> ...



We are speaking about the tactical deployment thereof not the right.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Mudflap said:
> ...


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I am not sure what you mean in the first question, but I can tell you in the second, whether you choose to believe me or not is your option.

I had 5 years as an infantryman in the US Army, from 1978 to 1983 and all the basic and AIT accompanying that, along with some informal long range target training,  M911 training, etc.

Post Army I have had training in personal hand held weapons to get a CCW in Virginia and Utah and to be qualified to carry in Texas.

My most recent class was about 4 years ago that I took with my son who is also a CCW holder.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



So you have had no civilian combative concept training.  Again its not my ego or sense of superiority trying to get you to see. 

Rest my case.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

Delta4Embassy said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> ...



Yeah, I had a thingy like that a while back, in the end the rude ass hat started to cuss me, and I walked out of the theater since management would not stop the bastards.

Welcome to Obamerica.


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Mudflap said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...


Adam got her gun.  He killed her.  She did not secure the gun from his mentally disturbed hands.  Are you trying, albeit ever so clumsily, to justify Mrs. Lanza's irresponsibility?

If citizens cannot store their weapons safely in their homes, why are we expected to believe they will handle them responsibly in public?

Carrying a Glock with the safety off is not very responsible considering the design flaw associated with Glocks.  Carrying a loaded weapon just so you can save the day a la Dirty Harry is an immature outlook.  Thinking that armed teachers will prevent school room shootings is also short sighted.  Reagan and four others were shot while surrounded by the best armed, best trained cadre of law enforcement officers in history.

There must be something about guns that fogs the mind and suggests that the carrier of a weapon can be a super hero.  Obviously the logic is distilled from watching movies or a basic feeling that life is cheap.  How sad.  How under educated.  How tragic.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


What did he kill her with?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



She was asleep when he killed her. So does it matter? and she didn't have an assault rifle


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



100% left wing alarmist bull shit.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



There is no way to actually 'secure' a weapon from someone who lives in your own home 100%. You are talking fantasy dude.



Nosmo King said:


> If citizens cannot store their weapons safely in their homes, why are we expected to believe they will handle them responsibly in public?



Its none of your business if she can or not.



Nosmo King said:


> Carrying a Glock with the safety off is not very responsible considering the design flaw associated with Glocks.  Carrying a loaded weapon just so you can save the day a la Dirty Harry is an immature outlook.  Thinking that armed teachers will prevent school room shootings is also short sighted.



It has worked in Isreal and Thailand; not a mass murder of students since.




Nosmo King said:


> There must be something about guns that fogs the mind and suggests that the carrier of a weapon can be a super hero.  Obviously the logic is distilled from watching movies or a basic feeling that life is cheap.  How sad.  How under educated.  How tragic.



There must be something about fascism that fogs the mind and suggests that the government can be a super hero though literally minutes away from the scene.  Obviously the logic is distilled from watching movies or a basic feeling that life is cheap.  How sad.  How under educated.  How tragic.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Sure thing Mr. Zimmerman.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 16, 2014)

This particular story brought to mind old Time Life book commercials about the old west where the narrator says something about some outlaw "who once shot a man for snoring too loud." I wonder if we're gonna see this or similar stories in future Time Life books, "a man was once shot in a theatre for texting." 

Moral being: leave your cellphones in the car at the theatre.

My Mom's used to be a bad-user of her cell using it driving like. At least until I threatened to chuck it out of the car if she used it again. Repeated, light-hearted mentions of Highway Patrol tests showing use of such devices was equal to being legally impaired hadn't sunk in. Having it chucked out the window however worked. 

For the record, I've yet to own or use such a device. I consider them intrusive and bothersome for all but emergency workers and first-responder types. If you NEED to be reachable fine. If not, they're a fad item like pagers.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



100% garbage. You have to take a basic training class in firearms to get a CCW permit, and to use a weapon against a common thug requires very little training. Perhaps if I come into a fight with a trained killer, he just might have the advantage but its way more likely that the average CCW holder will only face the common street thug.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Mudflap said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Ignorant garbage.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Seems like you are one squared away steely-eyed dealer of death then.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Mudflap said:
> ...



Ego man ego.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> A defensive gun in your home and a defensive gun on your hip in public are not the same animal.



Thank you Captain Obvious. That doesn't make your argument any less ignorant or pointless.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Mudflap said:
> ...


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



What a load of bullshit!


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Adam got her gun.  He killed her.  She did not secure the gun from his mentally disturbed hands.  Are you trying, albeit ever so clumsily, to justify Mrs. Lanza's irresponsibility?
> 
> If citizens cannot store their weapons safely in their homes, why are we expected to believe they will handle them responsibly in public?
> 
> ...



Glocks don't have a manual safety. Is that what you mean about the design flaw?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > A defensive gun in your home and a defensive gun on your hip in public are not the same animal.
> ...



Right but loosing my ego, knowing I don't know everything just cause I bought a gun doesn't make me gunfighter and seeking out credible trainers to enlighten me serves my family well.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Thanks for making my point dumbass. Zimmerman used his weapon properly. He didn't use it until it was clearly self-defense, he didn't get it taken away from him, and the perp is dead. To my knowledge, GZ didn't get any other training except the class that he took to get his CCW. Which is exactly my point.

Ironically, you just shot yourself in the foot!


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Adam got her gun.  He killed her.  She did not secure the gun from his mentally disturbed hands.  Are you trying, albeit ever so clumsily, to justify Mrs. Lanza's irresponsibility?
> ...



None of my handguns have external safeties and I plan on keeping it that way. In the heat of the moment people tend to forget to take it off safety, at that point it's nothing more than a club.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I see you have switched you tactic from irrelevant garbage to hyperbolic garbage, no one is buying your nonsense.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



It's absolute bull shit.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Thanks for not understanding the point and displaying your tactical fu is weak.

Zimmerman was lawful but stupid.

There was no upside to initiating contact when armed outside the home.

You get arrested, spend time in jail, massive trial, kill a kid, marked man for life, chance at loosing for your freedom for = NOTHING ZERO UPSIDE.  won the battle lost the war.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Ego has nothing to do with anything, drop that nonsense and maybe someone will take you seriously.

Nothing wrong with getting training, nothing at all, but we all know that that is not your point.


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Thanks for not understanding the point and displaying *your tactical fu is weak*.
> 
> Zimmerman was lawful but stupid.
> 
> ...



Typo? Will you translate that for me?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



My non-sense that focused tactical training including force on force, FATS, simunition,  from demonstrated material experts will increase your survivability as an armed citizen ?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for not understanding the point and displaying *your tactical fu is weak*.
> ...



Tactical-fu.  As in kung-fu.

Pursuing an un-immediate threat has no upside.  Ask Zimmerman.


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Mudflap said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



LOL! Okay.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



You're not following along very well then either.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 16, 2014)

Mudflap said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Adam got her gun.  He killed her.  She did not secure the gun from his mentally disturbed hands.  Are you trying, albeit ever so clumsily, to justify Mrs. Lanza's irresponsibility?
> ...



Glocks have at least 3 safeties. Been a while for me since being re-qualfiied on one, but as I recall the trigger has a safety built-in to the trigger itself which is depressed as you squeeze the trigger to fire. That's the main safety and ensures the weapon cannot fire unless trying to fire it. So anyone claiming Glocks have a design flaw doesn't know what they're talking about. Glocks are among the top tier firearms and so reliable and user-proof they are (or were) the standard issued weapon for flight crews (since they can also operate completely under water.)


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Mudflap said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



There is no point in carrying a gun with the safety on, IMO. Most guns designed for carrying have a long pull on the trigger. My Kel Tek 380 is that way.


----------



## Mudflap (Jan 16, 2014)

Delta4Embassy said:


> Mudflap said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



True, but they aren't manual.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Delta4Embassy said:


> So anyone claiming Glocks have a design flaw doesn't know what they're talking about. Glocks are among the top tier firearms and so reliable and user-proof they are (or were) the standard issued weapon for flight crews (since they can also operate completely under water.)



Only the 17 with spring cups.

I hated the Glock because my 1911 was extension of my dick.

Then I had to borrow a Glock 21 at Trident Concepts to finish the course because my Wilson Combat bling pew pew choked on its dick.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



No, I understood the point quite well but I ruined it for you and now you are back peddling. As you should know, Zimmerman should never have spent a moment in jail, and wouldn't have if it wasn't for the racist hatred from Sharpton and the media. And though Martin was still technically still a kid, he deserved to be shot, and was 100% guilty.

But we don't expect intellectual honesty from you and the only reason I'm even bothering to respond to your drivel is for the benefit if the conservative who might read this exchange.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



And switch back completed!

As I said no one is saying that training is a bad thing but if you were to attempt to be honest, you would admit that that was not your point.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Indeed there was lots of downside to Zimmerman's actions and no upside.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



It was entirely my point.

What do your assert my point is ?


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Well, who knows where you are going to put the goalposts next.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



You lost me ?


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Look, try to focus, you brought him up because you called me Zimmerman in response to my post and Zimmerman is an excellent example of what to do when you are armed in a confrontation. That was my point. Who the hell knows what point you've morphed over to now but you made my point for me.

The fact that Zimmerman has suffer since is irrelevant to anything other than digging yourself out of the hole you dug.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Look, try to focus, you brought him up because you called me Zimmerman in response to my post and Zimmerman is an excellent example of what to do when you are armed in a confrontation. That was my point. Who the hell knows what point you've morphed over to now but you made my point for me.



Zimmerman is perfect of example of  getting into an armed confrontation with no upside.

Zimmerman sought out the armed confrontation *which is totally legal and his right.*

But there was no upside.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Look, try to focus, you brought him up because you called me Zimmerman in response to my post and Zimmerman is an excellent example of what to do when you are armed in a confrontation. That was my point. Who the hell knows what point you've morphed over to now but you made my point for me.
> ...



Apparently you are unable to focus. It's more the pity that there are so many like you.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



What did GZ do that was stupid? 

You assume GZ initiated contact; why do you assume that? 

The evidence suggests it was Martin that initiated contact after GZ's fat little ass tired out and he was heading back to his vehicle (as my fat little ass would have been doing too, lol).


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Mudflap said:
> ...



Not my GLOCK. If I don't intend to fire my finger does not even touch that trigger.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > So anyone claiming Glocks have a design flaw doesn't know what they're talking about. Glocks are among the top tier firearms and so reliable and user-proof they are (or were) the standard issued weapon for flight crews (since they can also operate completely under water.)
> ...



Lol, dude are you sober?

It's kind of early in teh day....don't miss your AA meeting!

/just kidding


----------



## hjmick (Jan 16, 2014)

Gotta love the thread title... _*"The downside of carrying a firearm..."*_


As if EVERYONE who carries is doing this sort of thing rather than just a very, very, very small (and I can't emphasize just how small) number of gun owners...


Should have gone with, "The downside to idiots carrying a firearm."


But hey, who really cares?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



There had been a rash of robberies in the neighborhood and he thought he saw a suspicious person wandering around in the rain snooping into people's windows...what's he supposed to have done, hide his eyes?

Sometimes you guys that focus on 'tactics' forget that we do have obligations to help defend and protect our neighbors as well. It's not just all about us unless we want to be that way.

GZ didn't and he had every right to follow that little fuck and see what the hell he was up to.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Look, try to focus, you brought him up because you called me Zimmerman in response to my post and Zimmerman is an excellent example of what to do when you are armed in a confrontation. That was my point. Who the hell knows what point you've morphed over to now but you made my point for me.
> ...



Other than possibly protecting his neighbors?

Anyone know what happened to the burglary rates in that area after the killing?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

hjmick said:


> Gotta love the thread title... _*"The downside of carrying a firearm..."*_
> 
> 
> As if EVERYONE who carries is doing this sort of thing rather than just a very, very, very small (and I can't emphasize just how small) number of gun owners...
> ...



The point is, as I am fairly sure you know already, is to discredit all gun owners with the actions of a few idiots.

FACTS aint got nottin to do with nothing.


----------



## The Irish Ram (Jan 16, 2014)

When 2 men showed up at my house at 2 am. to help themselves to my stuff during a black out, they had no idea that on the other side of the window there was a rifle pointed at their heads not more than 10 feet away.  Made me feel a lot more secure about the situation they put me in.


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



still one in the same.  the only thing that changes the tactical deployment is the situation, not necessarily the location.  you can be taken by surprise in your house or on the street.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Other than possibly protecting his neighbors?
> 
> Anyone know what happened to the burglary rates in that area after the killing?



Not enough upside for me to risk what he did.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> What did GZ do that was stupid?
> 
> You assume GZ initiated contact; why do you assume that?
> 
> The evidence suggests it was Martin that initiated contact after GZ's fat little ass tired out and he was heading back to his vehicle (as my fat little ass would have been doing too, lol).



He left the safety of his vehicle to pursue someone, in the dark where there was no immediacy of threat.  His right, perfectly legal.   Tactically retarded. 

Look at all the bullshit  it got him.  Right or wrong.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



You misunderstand. Are you going to carry a gun with a hair trigger in your pocket or your holster? Are you going to carry a gun that doesn't have a round in the chamber? Ate you going to carry a gun with the safety on? You might as well leave it at home because you may not have time to use it when you need it.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> There had been a rash of robberies in the neighborhood and he thought he saw a suspicious person wandering around in the rain snooping into people's windows...what's he supposed to have done, hide his eyes?
> 
> Sometimes you guys that focus on 'tactics' forget that we do have obligations to help defend and protect our neighbors as well. It's not just all about us unless we want to be that way.



I am not obligated, nor defending my neighbors at the risk of my life, freedom and finances. Certainly not in condo complex.

In his shoes I would called the law and went back to my home to defend my castle.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > What did GZ do that was stupid?
> ...



It's wrong as I pointed out, but you won't let that stop your false narrative.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



The location in public changes the situation and thus the tactical deployment.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



False narrative ?   

George was in the right legally and look at what it cost him .......with ZERO, NADA, ZIP upside.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

The Irish Ram said:


> When 2 men showed up at my house at 2 am. to help themselves to my stuff during a black out, they had no idea that on the other side of the window there was a rifle pointed at their heads not more than 10 feet away.  Made me feel a lot more secure about the situation they put me in.



Why didn't you run outside with a gun to protect your neighbors ?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

*&#8220;Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but we rather have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.&#8221; *&#8211; Aristotle - 

See more at: 7 Habits of Highly Effective Shooters | Center Mass Group


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Yes, false narrative. But your narrative changes every time you get cornered. As for this new narrative my answer is that for every GZ there are at least two people who save the lives and property of themselves and others.

All upside, no downside.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

As for myself, I've been carrying concealed ever since the good state of Florida has allowed it. The upside has been that I am protected and so is my family and property. Another upside is that I'm exercising my rights as an American citizen and it is a right that so few people in the world have. Finally, and most satisfying of all is that it pisses a lot if lefties off to no end.

The downside has been.........non-existant.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Show me a narrative change....post number ?

Your ego has you convinced because you bought you a pew pew and went to 2hr CCW class you're going to run out and save the lives and property and others.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

Seems as if open carry advocates are itching for a fight.  They anticipate danger at every turn.  How many folks have ever been assaulted in a situation where deadly force is the one and only way out?  Who here lives in Lebanon or Iraq or some other third world shit hole where deadly force is a matter of day to day existence?

I submit that most all Americans live in safe, secure neighborhoods where gun use is limited to criminal on criminal action.  Where home invasions are a rarity if not mythical occurrence.  Gun toting morons see themselves as idealistic vigilantes.  Wild West heroes.  Movie characters admired for their stoic toughness.  Anything but the typical American experience.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Seems as if open carry advocates are itching for a fight.  They anticipate danger at every turn.  How many folks have ever been assaulted in a situation where deadly force is the one and only way out?  Who here lives in Lebanon or Iraq or some other third world shit hole where deadly force is a matter of day to day existence?
> 
> *I submit that most all Americans live in safe, secure neighborhoods where gun use is limited to criminal on criminal action*.  Where home invasions are a rarity if not mythical occurrence.  Gun toting morons see themselves as idealistic vigilantes.  Wild West heroes.  Movie characters admired for their stoic toughness.  Anything but the typical American experience.



Tell that to the victims of mass school, mall and theater shootings. These didn't happen in third world countries or even crime-ridden neighborhoods.

Must be nice living in a fantasy world.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Almost every post you make nit wit.

And I'm ex military, there was no need for me to take a class loser.

If you had a shred of intellectual honesty, we could have a discussion, alas....


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Seems as if open carry advocates are itching for a fight.  They anticipate danger at every turn.  How many folks have ever been assaulted in a situation where deadly force is the one and only way out?  Who here lives in Lebanon or Iraq or some other third world shit hole where deadly force is a matter of day to day existence?



Why do you assume using a gun for self defense necessarily means using deadly force?
You do realize that merely brandishing a gun is most likely enough to extricate you from a potentially dangerous situation don't you?



> I submit that most all Americans live in safe, secure neighborhoods where gun use is limited to criminal on criminal action.  Where home invasions are a rarity if not mythical occurrence.  Gun toting morons see themselves as idealistic vigilantes.  Wild West heroes.  Movie characters admired for their stoic toughness.  Anything but the typical American experience.



Even in safe neighborhoods a person can be the victim of a violent crime.

I have been the victim of a violent crime.  I was walking home after working a double shift. I had a few hundred dollars on me.  I usually never carried that much but I was planning on going to the bank after my shift but when the overtime came up I figured I'd take the work and go to the bank the next day.

I was held up by 2 guys robbed and beat up pretty good.

Now if you're lucky enough not to have been a victim of a violent crime good for you but I for one made the decision then and there that I would not be defenseless ever again.

Years later I now do not carry everywhere I go but I know I have the right to if I feel there is need and when I feel the need I carry a weapon.

I am glad I live in a country that allows a man the means to protect himself from those that would do him harm.  If you choose not to exercise that right then good for you but you should not be so quick to deny others their right to self protection. 

I do not fancy myself a vigilante.  In fact if I were to witness a crime I would not pull my weapon I would call the police after all I do not have a carry permit to protect the public.  I have it to protect myself.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Seems as if open carry advocates are itching for a fight.  They anticipate danger at every turn.  How many folks have ever been assaulted in a situation where deadly force is the one and only way out?  Who here lives in Lebanon or Iraq or some other third world shit hole where deadly force is a matter of day to day existence?
> 
> I submit that most all Americans live in safe, secure neighborhoods where gun use is limited to criminal on criminal action.  Where home invasions are a rarity if not mythical occurrence.  Gun toting morons see themselves as idealistic vigilantes.  Wild West heroes.  Movie characters admired for their stoic toughness.  Anything but the typical American experience.



My house has never been broken into, but I have an alarm system. I've never had a fire in my kitchen, but I have a fire extinguisher. Are you saying things that ignorant because you think no one will know how to respond or do you actually believe that stuff?

Do you actually think that you can try to paint a picture of peoe who carry as some sort if cowboy wanna-bes? Is this what you have to tell yourself to justify your position or are you under the false impression that your ruse will work or that anyone cares what you think of them?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Pretty broad brush there.

I have a permit so I can protect myself not you, not the public.  If I saw you getting beaten up I would call the cops and I might wait for them to show up or I might not. I figure if you didn't want to carry a weapon to protect yourself then you wouldn't want anyone else to use a weapon to protect you except for the police.

I am not about to risk my life for a stranger.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Seems as if open carry advocates are itching for a fight.  They anticipate danger at every turn.  How many folks have ever been assaulted in a situation where deadly force is the one and only way out?  Who here lives in Lebanon or Iraq or some other third world shit hole where deadly force is a matter of day to day existence?
> ...


What would have prevented such tragedies?  Keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally deranged.  Slapping a pistol in the hands of a teacher would not do it.  The rich and powerful surrounded by well trained, well armed cadres still get shot by the mentally frazzled.

But carrying a piece does not equal security.  Adding guns to a heated situation makes for a coroner's inquest.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

There is a lot that the gun grabbers don't know, a lot that they refuse to know, and a lot that they think they know but isn't true. That kind of thinking is necessary on order to maintain a mindset that is juxtaposed with reality.


----------



## Nosmo King (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > Seems as if open carry advocates are itching for a fight.  They anticipate danger at every turn.  How many folks have ever been assaulted in a situation where deadly force is the one and only way out?  Who here lives in Lebanon or Iraq or some other third world shit hole where deadly force is a matter of day to day existence?
> ...


Alarm systems and fire extinguishers are not deadly weapons.  They are not analogous to guns.  Who ever heard of a kid finding a fire extinguisher and killing himself or his playmate accidentally?

But put a gun within reach of a child and tragedy follows.  Add a gun to a heated situation and death follows.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Seems as if open carry advocates are itching for a fight.  They anticipate danger at every turn.  How many folks have ever been assaulted in a situation where deadly force is the one and only way out?  Who here lives in Lebanon or Iraq or some other third world shit hole where deadly force is a matter of day to day existence?
> 
> I submit that most all Americans live in safe, secure neighborhoods where gun use is limited to criminal on criminal action.  Where home invasions are a rarity if not mythical occurrence.  Gun toting morons see themselves as idealistic vigilantes.  Wild West heroes.  Movie characters admired for their stoic toughness.  Anything but the typical American experience.



I submit that you have no interest in actually discussing the issue and instead are trying to marginalize those you disagree with by insulting them and making ignorant and prejudicial statements designed to "shame" those who disagree with you into silence.  You may achieve that "silence", but it won't change their minds, nor help you sway them into agreeing with you on this issue.  

In fact, all you really have done is create the impression that you are merely a self righteous, relentlessly ignorant gadfly who has nothing of worth to offer in a discussion.  Please take a moment and try again.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



What would stop such tragedies? Putting cops in schools.

The rich and powerful do get attacked but rarely and we aren't talking about one or two shots then body guards take you down, we are talking about a kid who goes to a school and shoots unfettered for many minutes at a time.

Nothing "equals" security, especially being unarmed.

Your analogies need a LOT of work.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Funny I've had a carry permit for over 20 years and have owned guns for as long I have had a weapon on me and gotten into heated arguments and no one ever got killed.

Imagine that.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Whether they are deadly weapons is irrelevant, it wasn't your point and you know it.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



He's not too bright. I blame public education.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Yes keeping guns out of the deranged peoples hand would be ideal, but unfortunately not realistic. 

But yes having someone there that was capable of fighting back could have saved innocent lives.

Is your money worth more than your children?

We have armed guards protecting our money in banks while our schools which holds our most prized possessions goes unprotected.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> He's not too bright. I blame public education.



Please don't blame public education for that one...they can only work with what comes in the door.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



So you can't post one ?

I am not familiar with military training that provides you civilian defensive shooting techniques and strategies.

Qualifying with an M9 is not defensive combat training.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Exactly.  If your plan is to be a hero or engage in a public gunfight you're fucked out of the gate.

What are your thoughts on Zimmerman's actions ?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


There was probably blame on both sides there.

Then again if Zimmerman shared my attitude on what a concealed weapon is for nothing would have happened.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



I share your same attitude as to what CCW is for.

Zimmerman although legal in his actions was stupid tactically.  He got lucky.

But the "I am obligated to come to my neighbor's defense" crowd will be along shortly.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > He's not too bright. I blame public education.
> ...



All right, you make a good point.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



The experience of the Isrealis and the Siamese proves you wrong, dude. They have let their teachers be armed and have not had an incident yet.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



roflmao


Right out of Hollywood.

By that logic every gun show should wind up in a mass shooting, instead their are none, dumbass.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



What is the matter with you? I mean besides the obvious? I said "almost every post you made". How hard is that to understand?

Hey dumbass, military training is plenty to handle oneself in a civilian situation.
And we have more than one firearm in the military and many of us are trained in close quarter combat dipshit.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Other than possibly protecting his neighbors?
> ...



Yeah, that is why a lot of people admire the guy.

not sure I can say the same about those more tactically minded than neighborly minded.

If George Zimmerman called me up in the middle of the night and asked me to drive to Texas and give him a ride to Richmond, I would do it without compliant.

You I would hang up on.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > What did GZ do that was stupid?
> ...



Trying to protect your neighbors is not stupid; it is simply based on a different set of priorities, like protecting others as much as yourself.

Thank God for men like GZ.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



I carry a holstered Glock with a live round in the chamber. It is a rubber bullet but it chambers the next one really fast and that one is not rubber.

And there is no safety on, lol, which is why I don't put my finger on the trigger.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > There had been a rash of robberies in the neighborhood and he thought he saw a suspicious person wandering around in the rain snooping into people's windows...what's he supposed to have done, hide his eyes?
> ...



People have felt that way for millions of years...then civilization came along, lol.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Nosmo King said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



The thing that these deranged idiot gun grabbers don't understand (well, there's a LOT they don't understand), is that when a heated situation occurs and a person with a gun doesn't draw the weapon, no one ever hears about it. 

Hyperbole, strawman arguments, and irrelevant nonsense is all they have in their arsenal.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



No, it was not wrong, just a different set of priorities.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Again, except for protecting his neighbors which we all know you don't give a shit about.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> As for myself, I've been carrying concealed ever since the good state of Florida has allowed it. The upside has been that I am protected and so is my family and property. Another upside is that I'm exercising my rights as an American citizen and it is a right that so few people in the world have. Finally, and most satisfying of all is that it pisses a lot if lefties off to no end.
> 
> The downside has been.........non-existant.



lol, you know it.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



What was GZ's blame, dude? He should have kept is eyes low to the ground and let the criminal scope out the next neighbors house to rob?

Yeah, real courage there, ace.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



When I was talking about a long pull on a trigger its to protect from the gun accidentally going off when it's in my pocket. I don't go around with my finger on the trigger. Despite what the liberals think.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



You have nothing.  

You are the exact ego gun guy I was referring to, typically ex-military that thinks they are uber-squared away and top tier but yet not invested in tactical skill development suited for the civilian defensive concealed permit holder.

We see you no-loads show up monthly at shoots.  It is comical.  

QCB tactics to the grocery store.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Lol, says I have to distribute more rep first, lol, so here is a thumbs up instead!


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> What was GZ's blame, dude? He should have kept is eyes low to the ground and let the criminal scope out the next neighbors house to rob?
> 
> Yeah, real courage there, ace.



Ah its *courage.*

Fool.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Not you personally, but a lot of people that are used to carrying a DA revolver get used  to having the finger ride the trigger till they want to pull.

Cant do that with a GLOCK, so I don't touch it till ready to fire.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > What was GZ's blame, dude? He should have kept is eyes low to the ground and let the criminal scope out the next neighbors house to rob?
> ...



So I am a fool for protecting my neighbors?

Lol, I would rather be a fool than a coward, you piece of shit.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> I carry a holstered Glock with a live round in the chamber. It is a rubber bullet but it chambers the next one really fast and that one is not rubber.



A rubber bullet chambered in your gun.  

What is the tactical upside of that ?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



You are a coward, narcissist and a fucking shit-for-brains.

Go fuck yourself.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > I carry a holstered Glock with a live round in the chamber. It is a rubber bullet but it chambers the next one really fast and that one is not rubber.
> ...



I don't give a fuck what you think about tactics or what shit comes out of your mouth.

Fuck you.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Yes, it was wrong because his point was that having the gun caused GZ's problems. That is incorrect. What caused his problems was Al Sharpton and the racists in the media. Had GZ killed a white man, no one would know his name and he wouldn't have spent a second in jail.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Your a fool.   Your foolish bravado is stroked by thinking your a protector of the neighborhood with CCW, Glock and Rubber bullet.

You are indeed a Zimmerman.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



No one gives a rats ass what you think. You've been proven wrong, your bull shit has been debunked, you've been measured and been found wanting. Nothing left to do but point at you and laugh.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Ego ate you up.  Just like I opened with.

Rubber bullets.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

We have enough anti gunners to argue with, without arguing between each other.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



When these left wing nut jobs run out of things to say, they start throwing anything they can out there. Most of the time they don't even believe the stupid shit they say.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



What did you debunk ?

You're so high-speed you can't possibly learn anything from professionals to better your survivability and the defense of your loved ones ?

You just know it all.  Got it.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Left-wing ?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> We have enough anti gunners to argue with, without arguing between each other.



bump


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> We have enough anti gunners to argue with, without arguing between each other.



The best arguments are between gunners.

It is when you can look at yourself and realize _"Hey I don't know everything but I can arm myself with all the tools if I turn my ego off an seek focused training"_


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Sorry, thought you meant GZ was wrong, lol.

Reading too many posts too quickly.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > We have enough anti gunners to argue with, without arguing between each other.
> ...



So why don't you follow your own damned advise?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



OODA might not be leftwing, but he is being totally centered on protecting his own and to hell with everyone else, including his neighbors, which is fucking disgusting.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



No, I don't want an accidental firing to put a bullet through a wall and kill or maim someone, shit-for-brains.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I did.  I had $3000 custom combat 1911, best leather, videos, books and thought I was a true blue gunslinger.

Then an IDPA COF run by pros (true BTDT) showed me I was sorely lacking.

But I was humble, willing to work and eager to learn so the BTDT eventually took a shine to me. 

That led to focused training opportunities which costs way more than any gun.

And through that training, I realized I didn't know shit and was weak.   Many years of chasing this for fun and seriousness have totally changed my mindset and abilities including my choice of gun, caliber, carry options and tactical theology.

Am I a bad ass ? Nope.  Short fat balding lumpty.

But I am extremely confident of getting my family out of an armed encounter alive and free of legal costs.


----------



## JimH52 (Jan 16, 2014)

Guns are not going away and they probably shouldn't.  I have a gun cabinet full of them.  But we all know people who may have a carry permit that are on the edge.   I don't know what the solution is or even if there is a solution.  But there has got to be some relationship between gun ownership and mental health.  At this point I just don't know what it should be...


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



You're just planning to be negligent.  

There are no accidental firings.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Not according to this DEMOCRAT gun owner it happens all the time? 
Kentucky Rep. Accidentally Fires Gun in Her Office: ?I am a gun owner. It happens?


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



No problem.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Meh, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck......


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



He throws the word "ego" around as if it means something, and is some sort of magic bullet.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 16, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Guns are not going away and they probably shouldn't.  I have a gun cabinet full of them.  But we all know people who may have a carry permit that are on the edge.   I don't know what the solution is or even if there is a solution.  But there has got to be some relationship between gun ownership and mental health.  At this point I just don't know what it should be...



Look up how many people in this country have been issued CCW permits and then look up how many people with CCW permits commit crimes. Then rethink your position.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I can surely see your blindness to the concept of restrained ego and personal growth.

Anyone who claims they cannot benefit, improve lethal hit probability or learn from focused, proven defensive firearms training from true professionals would not thrive with those professionals anyway.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Funny, I don't recall saying that they are always found not guilty. Was I dreaming?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Peterf said:


> Why do some Americans think they are 'safer from the government' if they own guns?   I've not heard that the IRS, for example, only extorts taxes from the gunless.
> 
> Imo people are not freer in a US awash with firearms than they are in New Zealand or Denmark or 30 other countries.   The idea that gun-ownership keeps you free is a myth.



Why do you think the government cares if you are safe?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Chicago has lax gun laws?

Oakland has lax gun laws?

Washington DC has lax gun laws?

El Paso Texas, which is mere feet from one of the deadliest cities in the world, is the victim of the fact that Texas has very lax gun laws, yet it is one of the safest cities in the country.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Nosmo King said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Are you  drunk?

I said we need to seriously consider getting rid of the standing army that we call police. That does not mean I want vigilante justice, it means I think we should consider getting rid of the standing army that passes itself off as something it isn't.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Nosmo King said:
> ...



Because he killed her, and stole her weapons, that proves she didn't secure them properly, got it.

I bet you think women who get raped deserve it, don't you?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 16, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Warrior102 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



If you did you would have been shot by a vigilante cop by now.


----------



## Geaux4it (Jan 16, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



Um, no it could not have been anybody with a CCW. 99.9% of CCW holders went about their lives lawfully that day

-Geaux


----------



## Geaux4it (Jan 16, 2014)

Lets be real here.. Since the police are not legally required to come to my aid, and when they do, they are minutes/hours away, I'm on my own 

Who am I to rely on for me and my families protection late at night when the glass breaks?

Kimber... That's who

-Geaux


----------



## Soupnazi630 (Jan 16, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



No this was not the reason for the second amendment the redcoats were long since vanquished by the time it was written.

Buy a history book.

It is meant to protect individuals from other individuals and from the government.

All freedom and rights are predicated on the ability to protect them which is garunteed by the second amendment which makes it never obsolete.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Projection is my best bet.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 16, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



lol, you are so full of yourself, your assertions are the epitome of unperceived irony.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 17, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



You have been anything other than willing to learn from any of the people trying to school your self-centered ass here was what I was plainly referring to, idjit.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 17, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Coming from a someone who keeps a rubber bullet in his Glock cause he is going to ND in his house.   You know it all too.   I told your ego would be bruised at the outset.

I was right.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 17, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



Actually that proves nothing of the sort.

Lanza could have gotten the keys to the secured weapons while his mother was asleep.

Most parents trust their kids and don't believe they will do something like stealing from them and then murdering them.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 17, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > Guns are not going away and they probably shouldn't.  I have a gun cabinet full of them.  But we all know people who may have a carry permit that are on the edge.   I don't know what the solution is or even if there is a solution.  But there has got to be some relationship between gun ownership and mental health.  At this point I just don't know what it should be...
> ...



You mean like the retired cop who shot a guy over popcorn and a text message?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 17, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



An ND is ALWAYS possible by anyone. That is why you should respect the gun and not play with it like too many cops do.

That you seem to think it cant ever happen to you shows  your lack of humility, your boundless ego and your fucking stupidity.




OODA_Loop said:


> You know it all too.   I told your ego would be bruised at the outset.
> 
> I was right.




I have no ego, I simply despise fraudulent bullshit cretins like you.


----------



## Geaux4it (Jan 17, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > JimH52 said:
> ...



I thought you loons wanted the police to have weapons? You know, once a cop always a cop.

-Geaux


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 17, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> An ND is ALWAYS possible by anyone. That is why you should respect the gun and not play with it like too many cops do.





Operative word in ND being ?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 17, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> I have no ego, I simply despise fraudulent bullshit cretins like you.



Fraudulent ?

Get some training.  _ I know you already know and mastered it all and can't possibly learn anything._

I would leave the "rubber bullets" and any mention of them at home.

M'kay Hardtail?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 17, 2014)

knock it off you too


----------



## BlackSand (Jan 17, 2014)

I think people need to have greater respect for firearms.
Of course they are tools ... And very effective tools.
No matter how adamant the arguments anyone may have ... They are also a protected right in the Constitution.

I grew up in an environment where firearms were not uncommon ... And even as small children, we knew what they would do and not to touch them without permission.
If something in society is broken now ... And children find the need to go to a school and start killing their classmates ... It isn't the firearm that compelled them to do it.
If that were the case ... With the abundance of firearms available when I was growing up ... As well as what is available now ... There would be a lot more of it.

Relatively sane people impaired by alcohol get behind the wheel of a vehicle and kill roughly 28 people a day in this country ... Not to mention 226 children last year.
The vehicle isn't to blame ... The booze isn't to blame ... The idiot that got behind the wheel drunk and decided to drive is at fault.

As far as possibly disarming the American Public ... With the exception of heavy ordinance we have just about what the soldiers have  ... And don't need to be wasting bullets anyway.
What those people are asking for and counting on to be successful in their endeavor ... Is exactly what they are trying to prevent ... The useless loss of life.

.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 17, 2014)

PredFan said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



Actually, what caused his problems in the first place was a kid coming out of the dark and attacking him


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 17, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



It has nothing to to with deserving anything you idiot.

If her weapons were properly secured she and only she would have been able to access them.

It is a statement of fact.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 17, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Not really.  he didn't know if the kid was going to do anything illegal.

He should have just watched from his vehicle. If the kid had actually done something illegal he could have acted if the police didn't respond  If he had done as stated the kid most likely would have walked back to his father's house and nothing would have happened.

My stand on carrying a weapon is that it is for my protection should I find myself in harm's way not to go looking to put myself in a situation where I have to pull a weapon.

A righteous neighborhood watch would usually have people working in pairs at least and even then people in a neighborhood watch have no right to detain a person for merely walking down the street nor does anyone have an obligation to answer their questions or comply with their requests.

I know that if I was walking down the street and a couple guys were following me in a car I would feel nervous.  If they pulled up in front of me and both got out and walked towards me I would feel threatened. I most likely would tell them to stop coming at me before they got within 20 feet and at that point i would be justified in using a weapon wouldn't I?

I don't give a shit if they said they were neighborhood watch I wouldn't answer their questions nor would I comply with their requests they have no legal authority to do anything to anyone walking on a public street.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 17, 2014)

Geaux4it said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



No, old cops go senile too. Once retired a cop, then no longer a cop.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 17, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



The Martin kid was not threatening anyone was he?

Who was Zimmerman protecting?  Nothing illegal had happened


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 17, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



So how did Tray end of on top of Zimmy?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 17, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Zimmerman approached the kid in a menacing manner did he not?

As i said in a previous post if A guy I didn't know was following me in a car for blocks as I legally walked down the street I would start to feel apprehensive.  Wouldn't you?

If said person in car pulled up got out of his car and purposefully approached me I would feel threatened.  Wouldn't you?

If I told that person to stop coming at me and pulled my weapon I would have been justified wouldn't I?

From what I can tell the kid was doing nothing but walking on the street.  Zimmerman approached him with no cause.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 17, 2014)

Zimmerman approached the kid in a menacing manner did he not?

Obviously you believe so, but in court, the testimony was that Zimmerman had lost sight of the kid and then the kid approached him.

As i said in a previous post if A guy I didn't know was following me in a car for blocks as I legally walked down the street I would start to feel apprehensive.  Wouldn't you?

I believe that the fact that Zimmerman didn't notice Martin until Martin was in the apartment complex, so your characterization of "blacks" seems hyperbolic.

If said person in car pulled up got out of his car and purposefully approached me I would feel threatened.  Wouldn't you?

When it's happened in the past to me, I asked "Can I help you?" not struck the person in the face.  That might be why I'm still here.

If I told that person to stop coming at me and pulled my weapon I would have been justified wouldn't I?

You might, but according to what was said at trial, Zimmerman didn't access his weapon until he was on the ground being struck.

From what I can tell the kid was doing nothing but walking on the street.  Zimmerman approached him with no cause.

Again, apparently the kid approached Zimmerman.  You need to educate yourself before you post so you don't waste our time establishing the facts.


----------



## westwall (Jan 17, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > JimH52 said:
> ...









Yeah, just imagine if you got your wish and only cops had guns.  Just imagine how wonderful a country we would be then...


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 17, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> Zimmerman approached the kid in a menacing manner did he not?
> 
> Obviously you believe so, but in court, the testimony was that Zimmerman had lost sight of the kid and then the kid approached him.
> 
> ...


There is nothing definitive.

Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman: What really happened? - The Week

The only thing I took from anything is that the police told Zimmerman not to follow the kid he did not comply with the request thereby setting everything in motion.

IMO it was all more Zimmerman's fault.  If he had listened to the cops nothing would have happened.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 17, 2014)

Zimmerman was legally in the right but tactically retarded.

There is rarely upside to pursuit and confrontation as a citizen.

You find who you are chasing then what ?

1) Shoot
2) Get Shot
3) Fist Fight while retaining a gun


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 17, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...


If I was Tray, I would have ran away as fast as I could, not confront the guy. That's suicidal.


----------



## Warrior102 (Jan 17, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



The jury has spoken
You can shut the fuck up now
Thanks


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 17, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...


  When I was 17 I did a lot of shit I wouldn't do now.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 17, 2014)

Warrior102 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Just because he was found not guilty does not mean he had no fault.

Do you assume everyone tells the truth in court?

If I started a confrontation with someone and was getting my ass kicked and then pulled a weapon and killed the guy could I say I shot in self defense?  Of course I could. 

But I would still be at fault because I started the fight.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 17, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...


False.
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 17, 2014)

Dutch said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> > So we should disarm everyong because of one nut case ?
> ...


Huh.

You don't need a license to buy a car.
You don't need a license to own a car.
You don't need a license to keep the car on private property.
You don't need a license to possess a car on private property.
You don't need a license to drive a car on private property.

By now, you probably figured out that your point has failed.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 17, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > JimH52 said:
> ...



He wasn't issued a CC permit, he was a cop.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 17, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Wrong.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 17, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Geaux4it said:
> ...



Yep


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Jan 17, 2014)




----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 17, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


>


I have ignored you on that other thread, but I will comment on this thread.

You do realize Rham Emahanual (sp?) shut down several Chicago mental health facilities i?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 17, 2014)

Luddly Neddite said:


>



Why won't the Obama administration expand the NICS to include mental health records like the NRA worked to do ?

NRA, Democrats Team Up To Pass Gun Bill - CBS News


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 17, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



North Carolina does a mental health records check for anyone with a CHP.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 17, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Why won't the Obama administration expand the NICS to include mental health records like the NRA worked to do ?
> 
> NRA, Democrats Team Up To Pass Gun Bill - CBS News


Don't chase the red herring.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 17, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Why won't the Obama administration expand the NICS to include mental health records like the NRA worked to do ?
> ...



I think if you're not right in the head and have to take drugs accordingly = no gun for you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 17, 2014)




----------



## Spoonman (Jan 17, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Luddly Neddite said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



and runs the city with the toughest gun laws and worst gun violence


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 17, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Luddly Neddite said:
> ...



Chicago Closing Half Its Mental Health Clinics | World of Psychology

Before the schools, Mayor Emanuel closed the clinics | Ben Joravsky on Politics | Chicago Reader


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 17, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> There is nothing definitive.



But, that doesn't stop you from maligning Zimmerman based on nothing but your prejudices.

Shoo, you have no argument, just conjecture.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 17, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Obviously you know better than the FBI.  But, again, I point out that 100% of the homicides were committed by humans.  THAT'S where your efforts would be better aimed.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Vox said:
> ...



So only 323 murders were committed with rifles, which includes so called 'assault rifles'; so why are gun grabbing fascists so intent on banning assault rifles?

And once again, handguns are the most commonly used weapon because that is what they are designed for and thus are the preference by most murderers.

Where is the evidence that making possession of handguns illegal would not cause murderers to simply use other weapons or defy the law any way as happened for a number of years in the UK when they banned all guns?

North Korea is a national prison camp, under the most severe controls modern technology can devise and their homicide RATE is still triple what ours is.

It is one thing to observe that guns are so often used in murder, it is a totally different problem finding solutions that really reduce homicides with guns, like increased punishments for using guns in crimes has been shown to work.


http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-account-for-most-gun-deaths/



> Suicides by gun accounted for about six of every 10 firearm deaths in 2010 and just over half of all suicides, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.



And since 60% of gun homicides are self inflicted (suicide is homicide) banning guns would not stop those deaths as there are so many ways one can kill oneself if determined to do so, a gun ban would prevent nothing.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



And it is that kind of fascist gun grabbing zealotry that discredits gun control advocacy.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



I know, I know you want the mentally ill to have guns.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



OODA you know that's not true, why must you try to pick a fight with someone who is supporting the same thing we all are supporting? We must unite if we are to win, or we will lose this fight over irrelevant BS


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...




Because we are not fighting for the same thing.

I think if you have the diagnosis to take certain psych meds = No gun.

He lables me a facist.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


8583  murders were committed with firearms (2011).
This represents 0.0028% of the firearms in the US.
Clearly, this indicates that we need to further limit the rights of the law abiding.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Based on....  what?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


How intellectually dishonest of you.  Well done.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



I do not understand the question


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



If someone is mentally ill and medicated for it and you want them to keep their guns, you want the mentally ill to have______________?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



You are a fascist because you believe the state has the right to strip people of their God-given rights due to a mere statistical possibility they might do something.

So now I can add 'liar by omission' to your other fascist qualities.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Based on him hearing that one day just as his ears emerged from his sphincter, therefore it must be true.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



What a bunch of pure horse shit.

A person who has ADD can be taking prescribed drugs for it, and they ARE NOT mentally ill, you lying piece of fascist shit.

roflmao


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



No you lose your rights because you are something.  Mentally ill.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



ADD is not condition calling for drugs that cause suicidal or homicidal ideation.

Want to try again ?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Again, yo are full of shyte.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder*Medications - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Health Information - NY Times Health



> Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
> 
> Stimulant drugs may also:
> Worsen behavior and thought disturbance in patients with a pre-existing psychotic disorder. These drugs may also slightly increase the risk for auditory hallucinations, paranoia, and psychotic and manic behavior even in patients who do not have a history of psychiatric problems.
> ...



You stupid fucktard, lol.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



I missed suicidal or homicidal ideation in there....could you point it out ?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 18, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > There is nothing definitive.
> ...



I'm not maligning anyone.

I was asked for my opinion and I answered.

He disobeyed the order of the police.  That was the primary act that ended up with Martin being shot.

Zimmerman is an asshole and a hot head.  We learned that from all the subsequent shit he's been involved in since he got off.

What makes you think he was any more righteous when he disregarded the order of the police?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Subject to due process. 

If one answers yes to the adjudicated mentally ill question on the 4473, hell fail the background check and wont be able to purchase a firearm. 

That someone might be subject to mental health treatment is not in of itself justification to restrict ones Second Amendment rights, but if a judge determines, based on objective, documented evidence, that someone poses a threat to himself or others, prohibiting him from possessing a firearm is perfectly appropriate and Constitutional.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I am for expanding the law to make taking drugs which cause suicidal and homicidal ideation as a black box warning a no go on NCIS.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


You stated:


> think if you're not right in the head and have to take drugs accordingly = no gun for you


How did you arrive at this conclusion?
How is this standard a sound basis for denying someone their rights?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


False premise, that disagreewing with the standard you set equates to wanting the mentally ill in general to retain their right to arms.
The current standard is "adjucated metally unfilt" or something similar - you want to change the standard to 'anyone who is medicated'.  Disagreeing with the latter does not preclude agreeing with the former.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


You said:


> I think if you're not right in the head and have to take drugs accordingly = no gun for you.


Under that standard, anyone medicated for ADD/ADHD would lose their right to arms.

Either stand by your posiiton, retract it, or move the goalpost.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Their are way to many anti gunners with papers hanging from their wall saying they can diagnose someone mentally incompetent. If you want to go with that for a reason to take away someones right at least have more than one authoritative signature on the commitment papers. Three minimum


----------



## PredFan (Jan 18, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



It's amazing to me how many people, after the trial and everything, still don't know the facts.

1. The police never ordered Zimmerman to do anything.
2. The primary reason Martin got shot was because he assaulted Zimmerman.
3. Zimmerman had been accused if a lot since, but none of it was true.

Educate yourself or be shown to be a fool.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 18, 2014)

PredFan said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...


He was out there trolling for trouble. He thought Martin was suspicious because he was walking down the street and was convinced Martin was a "asshole" when Martin had done nothing.  If he had minded his own business, nothing would have happened.

The dispatcher told him not to follow.

and Zimmerman _said_ he was assaulted first there is no other proof to that statement.

I am not naive enough to believe that people tell the truth in court when there are no other witnesses to contradict him.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Which psych meds are you talking about, because almost all of the really serious ones are routinely prescribed to active duty cops, and no one ever talks about taking away their guns.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Because I refuse to institute a policy that says that someone who is getting treatment for social anxiety disorder does not have a right to defend themselves does not mean I want crazy people to have guns, it just means that I am smart enough to know that zero tolerance policies are fascist.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



That would violate the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. I know you really don't care about that, which is why you are a fascist.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I love it when idiots say stupid things.



> An FDA review of ADHD medications found they may pose a small increased  risk of psychosis  for about 1 in 1,000 people. In these cases, the  person may experience symptoms such as auditory hallucinations,  paranoia, and mania.  The nonstimulant Strattera carries a warning   like all antidepressant medications -- about potentially causing a  slight increased risk of suicide in young adults aged 18-24.



Adult ADHD Medication Side Effects

Feel free to apologize for being a lying fascist douchebag.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



I think the proliferation and actions of mass shooters and others which take black box warning psychotropic drugs causing suicidal and homicidal ideation have rendered the mentally adjudicated portion of 4473 impotent.

If you must and are taking those drugs, then that is adjudication enough.

I have a CCW and 4 NFA stamps,   I do not fear the government.

Come off the drugs with a clean bill of health = right restored.


----------



## zeke (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Hey my dad was crazy as hell and he ALWAYS had a gun. Even when he wasn't supposed to he had a gun. Even when the cops would take his gun in a traffic stop, after he got out of jail he would go get a gun.

What's the problem with crazy people and guns? He (my Dad) never shot anyone that I know of. He did shoot AT a few people). In Korea he shot people, but that was different.
I watched him and a cop draw down on each other once and thought for sure he was gonna get shot. But that was AFTER the cops were bouncing buck shot off the side of our house. Long story on that one.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Strattera will get you on the NO-GO it is not a ADD stimulant but and SNERI.

Bad stuff.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Well you have to change my words.

I didn't say *anyone is who is medicated.*  Did I ?

Anyone taking a drug known to make you kill.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...




Not right in the head was poor way of reiterating taking drugs which cause suicidal or homicidal ideation....look up thread.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



You think stuff that isn't really occurring, and a link that doesn't exist, is proof that we need to keep crazy people from having guns? Have you, personally, turned in your guns because of the delusions you are suffering?

Didn't think so.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


I'll ask agian:
How is this standard a sound basis for denying someone their rights?


----------



## zeke (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Alcohol is a drug very well known to make people kill. What you want to do about that drug?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...




Ones that have suicide or homicide ideation as a black box warning


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

zeke said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Everyone is crazy, but that isn't my point. My point is that Ooda is stupid.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



No drug makes you kill.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


You said:


> I think if you're not right in the head and have to take drugs accordingly = no gun for you.


That translates to "anyone who is medicated"


> Anyone taking a drug known to make yu kill.


I better move before the goalposts run me over.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Lol, too bad, ignorant coward.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



How is it not ?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



No my premise has been the black box sucide homicide drugs.

That was poor reiteration on my part and the is not your translation.

Does that make it clear ?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Like the ones given to people with epilepsy? 

Since no one ever had suicidal thoughts until these drugs were given as treatment for bipolar disorder, people who tend to have suicidal thoughts as a result of their mental illness, do you think it is remotely possible that the drugs aren't causing them? yet you want to take away guns from people with epilepsy simply because they get it treated.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Lol, why isn't passing the water test not?

You are such a fucking retard.  roflmao


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Everyone is crazy, but that isn't my point. My point is that Ooda is stupid.



Keeping guns away from people on drugs which make them kill is not stupid.


----------



## zeke (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> zeke said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



All I know is that I grew up with a man that at one point was adjudicated crazy. Shock treatment crazy. Suicide by cop crazy, three CCW arrests.  And he always had a gun. 
Gun ownership was his right and he was gonna exercise that right. Well that and the fact he was always hanging in the wrong bars and getting into fights and trouble. 

Don't know exactly what that means other than my Dad liked having guns. And he was not going to let anyone keep him from having one. No matter what.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Some are known to increase those thoughts in all ready mentally deficient people.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Lololol, clear as mud, you fucking coward.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Fail.
Support your position by soundly and substantively answering the question, or admit you cannot.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Everyone is crazy, but that isn't my point. My point is that Ooda is stupid.
> ...



Define what those drugs are, liar.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Everyone is crazy, but that isn't my point. My point is that Ooda is stupid.
> ...



Drugs do not make people kill. If they did the US government would simply feed drugs to soldiers and turn them loose whenever they needed someone dead.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

zeke said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > zeke said:
> ...



Good for him.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...




Which epileptic drug has suicidal ideation ?

I don't understand your other part you are all over the road.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Any drug that has a FDA black box warning that it causes suicidal or homicidal ideation.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



The proliferation and actions of mass shooters and others which take black box warning psychotropic drugs causing suicidal and homicidal ideation have rendered the mentally adjudicated portion of 4473 impotent.

If you must and are taking those drugs, then that is adjudication enough.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Not true.

What we actually know is that a statistically insignificant percentage of the people who take these drugs report having suicidal and/or homicidal thoughts. In case you missed it, the key phrase in that sentence is statistically insignificant. The government is great at over reacting to things, the proof of that is that the FDA actually requires that warning you going apeshit over even though the FDA doesn't believe that there is a causal link between the drugs and the thoughts. They also found that, despite the tenuous link between the drugs and suicidal thoughts, absolutely no one actually killed themselves while taking these drugs.

What are the real risks of antidepressants? - Harvard Health Publications

NIMH · Antidepressant Medications for Children and Adolescents: Information for Parents and Caregivers

That's right, you want to take away people's rights based on a complete misunderstanding of the science. Drugs do not cause people to kill, period.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Your delusions that people who take drugs are shooting people is not a valid reason to take away the rights of everyone on the planet.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



After all those words the NIH still caution patients need to monitored for those type of thoughts and actions.  And the warnings remain.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



I am not advocating taking the rights of everyone on the planet.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


In the last 10 years, exactly how many times has this happened?



> If you must and are taking those drugs, then that is adjudication enough.


"Adjudication" requires a court action, not a prescription.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



At least 31 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 162 wounded and 72 killed (in other school shootings, information about their drug use was never made publicneither confirming or refuting if they were under the influence of prescribed drugs).  The most important fact about this list, is that these are only cases where the information about their psychiatric drug use was made public. 

School Shooters on Drugs | CCHR International


----------



## PredFan (Jan 18, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



It's called "watching his neighborhood" fool.



Spiderman said:


> He thought Martin was suspicious because he was walking down the street and was convinced Martin was a "asshole" when Martin had done nothing.



Bull shit. Where did you get the "asshole" label from? Oh yeah, you made it up like you're making everything else up. Fool.



Spiderman said:


> The dispatcher told him not to follow.



Wrong again fool. That never happened.



Spiderman said:


> and Zimmerman _said_ he was assaulted first there is no other proof to that statement.



Yes there is, he had injuries, and the witnesses corraborated his story.



Spiderman said:


> I am not naive enough to believe that people tell the truth in court when there are no other witnesses to contradict him.



You are both naive and ignorant. Educate yourself.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

1. St. Louis, Missouri &#8211; January 15, 2013: 34-year-old Sean Johnson walked onto the Stevens Institute of Business & Arts campus and shot the school&#8217;s financial aid director once in the chest, then shot himself in the torso. Johnson had been taking prescribed drugs for an undisclosed mental illness.

2.Snohomish County, Washington &#8211; October 24, 2011: A 15-year-old girl went to Snohomish High School where police alleged that she stabbed a girl as many as 25 times just before the start of school, and then stabbed another girl who tried to help her injured friend. Prior to the attack the girl had been taking &#8220;medication&#8221; and seeing a psychiatrist. Court documents said the girl was being treated for depression.

3.Planoise, France &#8211; December 13, 2010: A 17-year-old youth held twenty pre-school children and their teacher hostage for hours at Charles Fourier preschool.  The teen was reported to be on &#8220;medication for depression&#8221;.  He took a classroom hostage with two swords. Eventually, all the children and the teacher were released safely.

4.Myrtle Beach, South Carolina &#8211; September 21, 2011: 14-year-old Christian Helms had two pipe bombs in his backpack, when he shot and wounded Socastee High School&#8217;s &#8220;resource&#8221; (police) officer. However the officer was able to stop the student before he could do anything further.  Helms had been taking drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and depression.

5.Huntsville, Alabama &#8211; February 5, 2010: 15-year-old Hammad Memon shot and killed another Discover Middle School student Todd Brown.  Memon had a history for being treated for ADHD and depression.  He was taking the antidepressant Zoloft and &#8220;other drugs for the conditions.&#8221; He had been seeing a psychiatrist and psychologist.

6.Kauhajoki, Finland &#8211; September 23, 2008: 22-year-old culinary student Matti Saari shot and killed 9 students and a teacher, and wounded another student, before killing himself.  Saari was taking an SSRI and a benzodiazapine. He was also seeing a psychologist.

7.Fresno, California &#8211; April 24, 2008: 17-year-old Jesus &#8220;Jesse&#8221; Carrizales attacked the Fresno high school&#8217;s officer, hitting him in the head with a baseball bat.  After knocking the officer down, the officer shot Carrizales in self-defense, killing him.  Carrizales had been prescribed Lexapro and Geodon, and his autopsy showed that he had a high dose of the antidepressant Lexapro in his blood that could have caused him to be paranoid, according to the coroner.

8.Dekalb, Illinois &#8211; February 14, 2008: 27-year-old Steven Kazmierczak shot and killed five people and wounded 21 others before killing himself in a Northern Illinois University auditorium. According to his girlfriend, he had recently been taking Prozac, Xanax and Ambien. Toxicology results showed that he still had trace amount of Xanax in his system. He had been seeing a psychiatrist.

9.Jokela, Finland &#8211; November 7, 2007: 18-year-old Finnish gunman Pekka-Eric Auvinen had been taking antidepressants before he killed eight people and wounded a dozen more at Jokela High School in southern Finland, then committed suicide.

10.Texas &#8211; November 7, 2007: 17-year-old Felicia McMillan returned to her former Robert E. Lee High School campus and stabbed a male student and wounded the principle with a knife.  McMillan had been on drugs for depression, and had just taken them the night before the incident.

11.Cleveland, Ohio &#8211; October 10, 2007: 14-year-old Asa Coon stormed through his school with a gun in each hand, shooting and wounding four before taking his own life. Court records show Coon had been placed on the antidepressant Trazodone.

12.Sudbury, Massachusetts &#8211; January 19, 2007: 16-year-old John Odgren stabbed another student with a large kitchen knife in a boy&#8217;s bathroom at Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School. In court his father testified that Odgren was prescribed the drug Ritalin.

13.North Vernon, Indiana &#8211; December 4, 2006: 16-year-old Travis Roberson stabbed another Jennings County High School student in the neck, nearly severing an artery. Roberson was in withdrawal from Wellbutrin, which he had stopped taking days before the attack.

14.Hillsborough, North Carolina &#8211; August 30, 2006: 19-year-old Alvaro Rafael Castillo shot and killed his father, then drove to Orange High School where he opened fire. Two students were injured in the shooting, which ended when school personnel tackled him. His mother said he was on drugs for depression.

15.Chapel Hill, North Carolina &#8211; April 2006: 17-year-old William Barrett Foster took a shotgun to school and took a teacher and a fellow student hostage at East Chapel Hill High School. After being talked out of shooting the hostages, Foster fired two shots through a classroom window before fleeing the school on foot. Foster&#8217;s father testified that his son had stopped taking his antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs without telling him.

16.Red Lake, Minnesota &#8211; March 21, 2005: 16-year-old Jeff Weise, on Prozac, shot and killed his grandparents, then went to his school on the Red Lake Indian Reservation where he shot dead 5 students, a security guard, and a teacher, and wounded 7 before killing himself.

17.Greenbush, New York &#8211; February 2004: 16-year-old Jon Romano strolled into his high school in east Greenbush and opened fire with a shotgun. Special education teacher Michael Bennett was hit in the leg. Romano had been taking &#8220;medication for depression&#8221;. He had previously seen a psychiatrist.

18.Red Lion, Pennsylvania &#8211; February 2, 2001: 56-year-old William Michael Stankewicz entered North Hopewell-Winterstown Elementary School with a machete, leaving three adults and 11 children injured. Stankewicz was taking four different drugs for depression and anxiety weeks before the attacks.

19.Ikeda, Japan &#8211; June 8, 2001: 37-year-old Mamoru Takuma, wielding a 6-inch knife, slipped into an elementary school and stabbed eight first- and second-graders to death while wounding at least 15 other pupils and teachers. He then turned the knife on himself but suffered only superficial wounds. He later told interrogators that before the attack he had taken 10 times his normal dose of antidepressants.

20.Wahluke, Washington &#8211; April 10, 2001: Sixteen-year-old Cory Baadsgaard took a rifle to his high school and held 23 classmates and a teacher hostage. He had been taking the antidepressant Effexor.

21.El Cajon, California &#8211; March 22, 2001: 18-year-old Jason Hoffman, on the antidepressants Celexa and Effexor, opened fire on his classmates, wounding three students and two teachers at Granite Hills High School. He had been seeing a psychiatrist before the shooting.

22.Williamsport, Pennsylvania &#8211; March 7, 2001: 14-year-old Elizabeth Bush was taking the antidepressant Prozac when she shot at fellow students, wounding one.

23.Oxnard, California &#8211; January 2001: 17-year-old Richard Lopez went to Hueneme High School with a gun and shot twice at a car in the school&#8217;s parking lot before taking a female student hostage.  Lopez was eventually killed by a SWAT officer.  He had been prescribed Prozac, Paxil and &#8220;drugs that helped him go to sleep.&#8221;

24.Conyers, Georgia &#8211; May 20, 1999: 15-year-old T.J. Solomon was being treated with the stimulant Ritalin when he opened fire on and wounded six of his classmates.

25.Columbine, Colorado &#8211; April 20, 1999: 18-year-old Eric Harris and his accomplice, Dylan Klebold, killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 26 others before killing themselves. Harris was on the antidepressant Luvox.  Klebold&#8217;s medical records remain sealed. Both shooters had been in anger-management classes and had undergone counseling.  Harris had been seeing a psychiatrist before the shooting.

26.Notus, Idaho &#8211; April 16, 1999: 15-year-old Shawn Cooper fired two shotgun rounds in his school, narrowly missing students. He was taking a prescribed antidepressant and Ritalin.

27.Springfield, Oregon &#8211; May 21, 1998: 15-year-old Kip Kinkel murdered his parents and then proceeded to school where he opened fire on students in the cafeteria, killing two and wounding 25. Kinkel had been taking the antidepressant Prozac. Kinkel had been attending &#8220;anger control classes&#8221; and was under the care of a psychologist.

28.Blackville, South Carolina &#8211; October 12, 1995: 15-year-old Toby R. Sincino slipped into the Blackville-Hilda High School&#8217;s rear entrance, where he shot two Blackville-Hilda High School teachers, killing one. Then Toby killed himself moments later. His aunt, Carolyn McCreary, said he had been undergoing counseling with the Department of Mental Health and was taking Zoloft for emotional problems.

29.Chelsea, Michigan &#8211; December 17, 1993: 39-year-old chemistry teacher Stephen Leith, facing a disciplinary matter at Chelsea High School, shot Superintendent Joseph Piasecki to death, shot Principal Ron Mead in the leg, and slightly wounded journalism teacher Phil Jones. Leith was taking Prozac and had been seeing a psychiatrist.

30.Houston, Texas &#8211; September 18, 1992: 44-year-old Calvin Charles Bell, reportedly upset about his second-grader&#8217;s progress report, appeared in the principal&#8217;s office of Piney Point Elementary School. Bell fired a gun in the school, and eventually wounded two officers before surrendering. Relatives told police on Friday that Bell was an unemployed Vietnam veteran and had been taking anti-depressants.

31.Winnetka, Illinois &#8211; 20 May 1988: 30-year-old Laurie Wasserman Dann walked into a second grade classroom at Hubbard Woods School in Winnetka, Illinois carrying three pistols and began shooting children, killing an eight-year-old boy, and wounding five others before fleeing. She entered a nearby house where she shot and wounded a 20-year-old man before killing herself. Dann had been seeing a psychiatrist and subsequent blood tests revealed that at the time of the killings, she was taking the antidepressant Anafranil.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Nearly Every Mass Shooting In The Last 20 Years Shares One Thing In Common, & It's NOT Weapons


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Mass shooters and meds. What they all have in common. | KETK | East Texas News, Weather and Sports | Tyler, Longview, Jacksonville


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


The list you provided includes individuals documented to have been under the influence of "psychiatric drugs" and included instances unrelated to guns.

I asked for the number of ishootings in the last 10 years involving a person that had been on "black box warning psychotropic drugs."

Please try again.


----------



## JimH52 (Jan 18, 2014)

WOW!  This thread has gone Viral!  Huh?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



From that list....... 13 identified that contain black box warnings....all the SSRI, SNRI, SDRI etc.   since 2004 (10 years)

_Is that really the intellectual level you're coming back with ?_


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

12:17 AM CDT on Monday, July 10, 2006
Associated Press 

HOUSTON - An antidepressant that Andrea Yates had been taking before she drowned her five children in 2001 has recently been found to possibly increase the risk of homicidal thoughts, according to a medical watchdog group that says Effexor's manufacturer has not warned the public. 

"Homicidal ideation" was added last year as one of the drug's rare adverse events on Effexor XR's label and on Wyeth's Web site. 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration defines rare as occurring in less than one in 1,000 people. In the U.S. alone, about 19.2 million prescriptions for Effexor were filled last year, but that does not reflect the number of people who take the drug because some of those are refills. 

Dr. Moira Dolan, executive director of the Medical Accountability Network, said she discovered the labeling change about two weeks ago when she stumbled across the FDA's MedWatch newsletter from November. The Madison, N.J.-based drug company did not send letters to doctors or issue warning labels. 

"People need to be warned that this is a possible side effect," Dolan, an Austin doctor who has reviewed Yates' medical records but is not involved in the case, said Sunday. "Families don't know to be aware of this possible effect. As doctors, we're not going to look through 36 pages of labeling." 

Effexor is Wyeth's top-selling drug, with $3.46 billion in 2005 sales worldwide, more than twice the total for its No. 2 product and 18 percent of its total revenues for last year. 

"We believe there is no causal link between Effexor and homicidality," said Wyeth spokeswoman Gwen Fisher. "In our minds, we've taken every precaution." 

She said that as Effexor was being studied for use in treating panic disorder, Wyeth found that only one person reported having homicidal thoughts in its clinical trial. Fisher said she did not know the trial date. 

In approving Wyeth's application to use Effexor for that disorder, the FDA wanted homicidal ideation listed as a rare adverse event, defined as something not proven to be linked to the drug, Fisher said. That is different from an adverse reaction, she said. 

Wyeth never notified doctors or issued warning labels because it found no causal link between its drug and homicidal thoughts, Fisher said. 

Dolan said the current Web site label mentions homicidal thoughts in the middle of a paragraph on page 36. Fisher said the warning about "homicidal ideation" also appears on the one-page package insert given to all patients. 

In 2004, the FDA ordered that all antidepressants carry "black box" warnings that they increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in children. That action was driven by data that showed that, on average, 2 to 3 percent of children taking antidepressants have increased suicidal thoughts and actions. The link is stronger with Effexor than with other antidepressants in the same class of drugs. 

James T. O'Donnell, assistant professor of pharmacology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago and the author of "Drug Injury: Liability, Analysis, and Prevention," said the homicidal ideation issue should be on the same level of public awareness. 

"For something as final as homicide, that's important to know about," O'Donnell said. 

But Fisher said the drug is safe and effective. Yates, who remains jailed, continues taking Effexor as well as an anti-psychotic drug to help stabilize her mental illness, according to a psychiatrist testifying in Yates' retrial that started two weeks ago. 

Yates, 42, has pleaded innocent by reason of insanity in her second murder trial. Her 2002 capital murder conviction was overturned on appeal because some erroneous testimony may have influenced jurors. 

Yates had been prescribed Effexor in varying doses since shortly after her first suicide attempt in 1999, said Dolan, who reviewed her medical records after her first trial at the request of her then-husband, Rusty Yates. A month before the murders, her daily dose had increased to 450 mg, twice the recommended maximum dose, Dolan said. 

Her lead attorney, George Parnham, has criticized the amount of medications Yates was prescribed before the children's bathtub drowning deaths. He said Wyeth should have publicized information about the possible connection between Effexor and thoughts of murder, but he said that will not affect Yates' case. 

"Obviously this is a severely mentally ill individual who was on a plethora of psychiatric meds," Parnham said. "There's no question mental illness killed those children." 

Parnham said Yates suffered from postpartum psychosis and drowned the children in the family bathtub while in a delusional state, which likely was exacerbated after she was suddenly taken off Haldol, a strong anti-psychotic drug. 

Yates, being tried in only three of the deaths, will be sentenced to life in prison if convicted. 

Effexor sales rose only 3.3 percent in 2005, compared with 2004, but jumped 8.8 percent in the first quarter of this year, to $945 million


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

> _A Canadian judge has ruled that Prozac caused a teenage boy to murder his friend, as the drug caused him to overreact &#8220;in an impulsive, explosive and violent way&#8221;
> Many drugs, particularly antidepressants, are associated with violence, including suicidal and homicidal tendencies. Of the top 10 drugs linked to violence, half are antidepressants _



The Damaging Effects of Prozac and Other Antidepressants


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Did you miss the part where I said the government always overreacts?

By the way, does this mean I made my point? Drugs do not cause the thoughts, and, even if they did, they definitely do not cause any actions.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



You actually are, you just are not honest enough to recognize it.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> By the way, does this mean I made my point? Drugs do not cause the thoughts, and, even if they did, they definitely do not cause any actions.



You made your point.

To say drugs do not cause thoughts and actions is inaccurate.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I already proved, using government sources, that your contention is bullshit. Using a source that wants to eliminate drugs as a way to treat mental illness just makes my case all the more convincing.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Making users of drugs with black box suicide and homicide prohibited from gun ownership is not taking the rights of everyone on the planet.

Do you take an anti-depressant ?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> 1. St. Louis, Missouri  January 15, 2013: 34-year-old Sean Johnson walked onto the Stevens Institute of Business & Arts campus and shot the schools financial aid director once in the chest, then shot himself in the torso. Johnson had been taking prescribed drugs for an undisclosed mental illness.
> 
> 2.Snohomish County, Washington  October 24, 2011: A 15-year-old girl went to Snohomish High School where police alleged that she stabbed a girl as many as 25 times just before the start of school, and then stabbed another girl who tried to help her injured friend. Prior to the attack the girl had been taking medication and seeing a psychiatrist. Court documents said the girl was being treated for depression.
> 
> ...



Unless you are making a case to eliminate "(T)he  biological/drug model of disease that is continually promoted by the  psychiatric/ pharmaceutical industry as a way to sell drug," you aren't actually making a case.

By the way, that quote came from your link to the CCHP.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, does this mean I made my point? Drugs do not cause the thoughts, and, even if they did, they definitely do not cause any actions.
> ...



Because people have no ability to think?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Keep telling yourself that, I am sure it makes you feel better.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Unless you are making a case to eliminate "(T)he  biological/drug model of &#8220;disease&#8221; that is continually promoted by the  psychiatric/ pharmaceutical industry as a way to sell drug," you aren't actually making a case.
> 
> By the way, that quote came from your link to the CCHP.



The CCHP and my contention are the same in that the drugs cause these issues.

They want people off them

I want people on them not having guns.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Please explain.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



If they are on psych drugs their thinking is impaired from the condition,

The drugs exacerbate the situation and turn thoughts into homicidal / suicidal ideation.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Unless you are making a case to eliminate "(T)he  biological/drug model of disease that is continually promoted by the  psychiatric/ pharmaceutical industry as a way to sell drug," you aren't actually making a case.
> ...



Not true.

The CCHP contends that merely prescribing these drugs is abusive and coercive. They insist that mental illness is not real, and that the only reason anyone is ever diagnosed as crazy is because society doesn't like the way they act. They want to eliminate the drugs, and the very concept of mental illness, and are willing to manufacture facts to fit their agenda.

But, please, keep using them as a reference.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



And, just to prove your point, you are willing to cite a group that thinks mental illness is an illusion.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



I don't agree with the CCHP.

I was using their list of school shootings.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 18, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Didn't cite the group.  Used their list. Certainly you can see my contention and theirs is diametric.

Seems like you are reaching.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 18, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


13.   Over 10 years.

Millions of people have taken these drugs and you can only identify 13 instances where people taking them have committed a relevant violent act - some not even involving a gun?

That's your "prolferation"?

Your argumrnt fails to show that these people are such a danger to society that the rights of eveyrone that takes these drugs needs to be further restricted.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



There have certainly been more but you forced very narrow search parameters.  I just did "school" shooters.

Look at all the murder/suicides of late.   Just in Florida last week depressed mom under treatment kills herself and two kids.

Do you take these drugs ?

What is your vested interest to keep those who do armed ?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Anecdotal evidence combined with ad hominem suggestions that disagreement means one is trying to protect vested interests, lol.

Guarding God given freedom from fascist twits like you is the DUTY of freedom loving people everywhere.

bitch


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



You endanger lawful, sane peoples' freedom.

You lack the wherewithal and capacity to realize it.  

You're closing with a juvenile name calling is proof.

Evolution has not been your friend.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Nothing here changes the fact that your argumrnt fails to show that these people are such a danger to society that the rights of eveyrone that takes these drugs needs to be further restricted.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> Nothing here changes the fact that your argumrnt fails to show that these people are such a danger to society that the rights of eveyrone that takes these drugs needs to be further restricted.



Sure it does.    

This all started about the time the selective reuptake inhibitors of various flavors came on the scene.

Keep people on those without a gun.

Gun violence absent criminal intent drops.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing here changes the fact that your argumrnt fails to show that these people are such a danger to society that the rights of eveyrone that takes these drugs needs to be further restricted.
> ...


You were able to cite 13 relevant instances over 10 a year period.
Fail.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Those were only school shootings under you pre-determined search parameters


School Shooting Prozac WITHDRAWAL 2008-02-15 Illinois ** 6 Dead: 15 Wounded: Perpetrator Was in Withdrawal from Med & Acting Erratically 
School Shooting Prozac Antidepressant 2005-03-24 Minnesota **10 Dead: 7 Wounded: Dosage Increased One Week before Rampage 
School Shooting Paxil [Seroxat] Antidepressant 2001-03-10 Pennsylvania **14 Year Old GIRL Shoots & Wounds Classmate at Catholic School 
School Shooting Zoloft Antidepressant & ADHD Med 2011-07-11 Alabama **14 Year Old Kills Fellow Middle School Student 
School Shooting Zoloft Antidepressant 1995-10-12 South Carolina **15 Year Old Shoots Two Teachers, Killing One: Then Kills Himself 
School Shooting Med For Depression 2009-03-13 Germany **16 Dead Including Shooter: Antidepressant Use: Shooter in Treatment For Depression 
School Hostage Situation Med For Depression 2010-12-15 France **17 Year Old with Sword Holds 20 Children & Teacher Hostage 
School Shooting Plot Med For Depression WITHDRAWAL 2008-08-28 Texas **18 Year Old Plots a Columbine School Attack 
School Shooting Anafranil 1988-05-20 Illinois **29 Year Old WOMAN Kills One Child: Wounds Five: Kills Self 
School Shooting Luvox/Zoloft Antidepressants 1999-04-20 Colorado **COLUMBINE: 15 Dead: 24 Wounded 
School Stabbings Antidepressants 2001-06-09 Japan **Eight Dead: 15 Wounded: Assailant Had Taken 10 Times his Normal Dose of Depression Med 
School Shooting Prozac Antidepressant WITHDRAWAL 1998-05-21 Oregon **Four Dead: Twenty Injured 
School Stabbing Med For Depression 2011-10-25 Washington **Girl, 15, Stabs Two Girls in School Restroom: 1 Is In Critical Condition 
School Shooting Antidepressant 2006-09-30 Colorado **Man Assaults Girls: Kills One & Self 
School Machete Attack Med for Depression 2001-09-26 Pennsylvania **Man Attacks 11 Children & 3 Teachers at Elementary School 
School Shooting Related Luvox 1993-07-23 Florida **Man Commits Murder During Clinical Trial for Luvox: Same Drug as in COLUMBINE: Never Reported 
School Hostage Situation Cymbalta Antidepressant WITHDRAWAL 2009-11-09 New York **Man With Gun Inside School Holds Principal Hostage 
School Shooting Antidepressants 1992-09-20 Texas **Man, Angry Over Daughter's Report Card, Shoots 14 Rounds inside Elementary School 
School Shooting SSRI 2010-02-19 Finland **On Sept. 23, 2008 a Finnish Student Shot & Killed 9 Students Before Killing Himself 
School Shooting Threat Med for Depression* 2004-10-19 New Jersey **Over-Medicated Teen Brings Loaded Handguns to School 
School Shooting Antidepressant? 2007-04-18 Virginia **Possible SSRI Use: 33 Dead at Virginia Tech 
School Shooting Antidepressant? 2002-01-17 Virginia **Possible SSRI Withdrawal Mania: 3 Dead at Law School 
School Incident/Bizarre Zoloft* 2010-08-22 Australia **School Counselor Exhibits Bizarre Behavior: Became Manic On Zoloft 
School/Assault Antidepressant 2009-11-04 California **School Custodian Assaults Student & Principal: Had Manic Reaction From Depression Med 
School Shooting Prozac Antidepressant 1992-01-30 Michigan **School Teacher Shoots & Kills His Superintendent at School 
School Shooting Threats Celexa Antidepressant 2010-01-25 Virginia **Senior in High School Theatens to Kill 4 Classmates: Facebook Involved: Bail Denied 
School Violence/Murder Antidepressants* 1998-05-04 New York **Sheriff's Deputy Shoots his Wife in an Elementary School 
School Knifing/Murder Meds For Depression & ADHD 2010-04-28 Massachusetts **Sixteen Year Old Kills 15 Year Old in High School Bathroom in Sept. 2009 
School Stabbing Wellbutrin 2006-12-04 Indiana **Stabbing by 17 Year Old At High School: Charged with Attempted Murder 
School Threat Antidepressants 2007-04-23 Mississippi **Student Arrested for Making School Threat Over Internet 
School Suspension Lexapro Antidepressant 2007-07-28 Arkansas **Student Has 11 Incidents with Police During his 16 Months on Lexapro 
School Shooting Antidepressant Withdrawal 2007-11-07 Finland **Student Kills 8: Wounds 10: Kills Self: High School in Finland 
School Shooting Paxil [Seroxat] Antidepressant 2004-02-09 New York **Student Shoots Teacher in Leg at School 
School Threat Prozac Antidepressant 2008-01-25 Washington **Student Takes Loaded Shotgun & 3 Rifles to School Parking Lot: Plans Suicide 
School Shooting Plot Med For Depression 1998-12-01 Wisconsin **Teen Accused of Plotting to Gun Down Students at School 
School/Assault Zoloft Antidepressant 2006-02-15 Tennessee **Teen Attacks Teacher at School 
School Shooting Threat Antidepressant 1999-04-16 Idaho **Teen Fires Gun in School 
School Hostage Situation Paxil & Effexor Antidepressants 2001-04-15 Washington **Teen Holds Classmates Hostage with a Gun 
School Hostage Situation Antidepressant Withdrawal 2006-11-28 North Carolina **Teen Holds Teacher & Student Hostage with Gun 
School Knife Attack Med for Depression 2006-12-06 Indiana **Teen Knife Attacks Fellow Student 
School Massacre Plot Prozac Withdrawal 2011-02-23 Virginia **Teen Sentenced to 12 Years in Prison For Columbine Style Plot 
School Shooting Celexa & Effexor Antidepressants 2001-04-19 California **Teen Shoots at Classmates in School 
School Shooting Celexa Antidepressant 2006-08-30 North Carolina **Teen Shoots at Two Students: Kills his Father: Celexa Found Among his Personal Effects 
School Shooting Meds For Depression & ADHD 2011-03-18 South Carolina **Teen Shoots School Official: Pipe Bombs Found in Backpack 
School Shooting Threat Antidepressant 2003-05-31 Michigan **Teen Threatens School Shooting: Charge is Terrorism 
School Stand-Off Zoloft Antidepressant 1998-04-13 Idaho **Teen [14 Years Old] in School Holds Police At Bay: Fires Shots 
School Shooting Antidepressant Withdrawal 2007-10-12 Ohio **Teen [14 Years Old] School Shooter Possibly on Antidepressants or In Withdrawal 
School Threat Antidepressants 2008-03-20 Indiana **Teen [16 Years Old] Brings Gun to School: There Is a Lockdown 
School Suicide/Lockdown Med For Depression 2008-02-20 Idaho **Teen [16 Years Old] Kills Self at High School: Lockdown by Police 
School Threats Prozac Antidepressant 1999-10-19 Florida **Teen [16 Years Old] Threatens Classmates With Knife & Fake Explosives 
School Stabbing Med For Depression 2008-02-29 Texas **Teen [17 Year Old GIRL] Stabs Friend & Principal at High School 
School Hostage Situation Prozac/ Paxil Antidepressants 2001-01-18 California **Teen [17 Years Old] Takes Girl Hostage at School: He is Killed by Police 
School Knife Attack Treatment For Depression & Strattera 2009-03-10 Belgium **Three Dead in School Day Care: Two Children & a Caregiver: Happened Jan 23, 2009 
School Shooting Plot Antidepressants 2009-09-22 England **Two English School Boys Plot to Blow Up High School 
School Arson Incidents Paxil 2002-04-12 Michigan **Unusual Personality Change on Paxil Caused 15 Year Old to Set Fires inside High School 
School Bomb Threat Med For Depression 2009-06-29 Australia **Vexed Father Makes Bomb Threat Against Elementary School 
School Violence Antidepressant 2005-11-19 Arizona **Violent 8 Year Old GIRL Handcuffed by Police at School 
School Violence Celexa Antidepressant 2002-01-23 Florida **Violent 8 Year-Old Boy Arrested At School 
School Threat/Lockdown Lexapro* 2008-04-18 California **Violent High School Student Shot to Death on Campus by Police 
School / Child Endangerment Antidepressants 2008-02-27 Canada **Wacky School Bus Driver Goes Berserk: Also Involved Painkillers 
School Violence Paxil 2004-10-23 Washington DC **Young Boy, 10 Year Old, Has Violent Incidents at School 
School Threat Wellbutrin Antidepressant 2007-04-24 Tennessee **Young Boy, 12, Threatens to Shoot Others at School 
School Hostage Situation Med for Depression 2006-03-09 France **Young Ex-Teacher Holds 21 Students Hostage 
School Shooting/Suicide Celexa 2002-10-07 Texas **Young Girl [13 Years Old] Kills Self at School With a Gun 
School Hostage Situation Paxil 2001-10-12 North Carolina **Young Man Holds Three People Hostage in Duke University President's Office 
School Murder Attempt Med For Depression 1995-03-04 California **Young Woman Deliberately Hits 3 Kids with Her Car at Elementary School: Laughed During Attack 
Murder Prozac 2011-09-16 Canada *16 Year Old Stabs 15 Year Old: Will Be Tried in Youth Court Because of Bad Reaction to Prozac 
Murder Attempt Wellbutrin* 2006-02-12 Washington *82 Year Old Man Found Not Guilty: Med Defense 
Murder Attempt Celexa Antidepressants 2011-02-08 Massachusetts *Coed at Wellesley Found Not Guilty Due to Celexa Antidepressant Use: Stabbed Boyfriend 8 times 
DUI Paxil 2003-02-15 Virginia *Defendant Acquitted of DUI Because of Involuntary


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Air Rage Paxil* [Seroxat] 2006-01-25 England *Diplomat Cleared of Drinking Charges: Drug Blamed 
Rampage Shooting Lexapro & Two Benzo's 2011-09-03 North Carolina *Eight Dead in Nursing Home: Jury Spares Death Penalty Due to Medications 
Murder-Suicide Celexa SSRI Antidepressant* 2010-04-22 Ireland *Jury Finds Celexa Cause of Murder-Suicide: Two Physicians Testify: Foundation Demands Action 
Murder-Suicide Paxil* [Seroxat] 2001-08-09 Wyoming *Jury Finds Paxil Was Cause of Murder-Suicide 
Shooting Antidepressant* 2005-03-05 Florida *Man Acquitted in Gas Station Shooting: Involuntary Intoxication by Med 
Robbery/Armed Paxil [Seroxat] WITHDRAWAL* 2003-08-10 England *Man Cleared of Charges by Using Paxil Defense 
Murder Zoloft* 1994-03-14 Alabama *Man Found Not Guilty Due to Psychosis Caused by Zoloft 
Assault Prozac* 2009-10-24 Kansas *Man Found Not Guilty of Assault Using Prozac Defense 
Murder Med For Depression* 2009-11-19 England *Man Found Not Guilty of Killing Wife While Sleepwalking 
Murder Zoloft* 2001-05-24 Australia *Man Found Not Guilty Using Zoloft Defense 
Murder Attempt Zoloft* 2004-04-24 California *Man Found Not Guilty: Used Zoloft Defense 
Murder Med For Depression 2011-08-23 England *Man Released From Prison Hospital Because his Murders Were Caused by Psychosis From Depression Med 
Murder-Suicide Attempt Effexor & Paxil* [Seroxat] 2003-06-17 Australia *Mother Acquitted by Using SSRI Defense 
Murder Attempt Zoloft* 2002-11-04 Arizona *Mother Acquitted of Attempted Child Murder 
Murder Paxil & ADHD Drug* 2000-05-18 Washington *Mother Stabs Daughter: Not Guilty by Reason of Drug Induced Insanity 
Murder Attempt Prozac 2008-05-20 Connecticut *Not Guilty Because of Psychosis Brought On by Prozac & Adderall 
Murder Cymbalta Antidepressant 2007-05-15 Texas *Not Guilty by Reason of Cymbalta Induced Insanity: Man Kills Wife 
Embezzlement/Bizarre Behavior Paxil* 2006-11-17 Florida *Not Guilty by Reason of Paxil Induced Insanity 
Bank Robbery Prozac* 2002-11-16 Connecticut *Not Guilty by Reason of Prozac Induced Insanity 
Murder Prozac* 2003-07-11 Louisiana *Not Guilty by Reason of Prozac Induced Insanity: Mother Kills Daughter 
Murder Paxil* 2011-05-20 California *Wife Given Probation After Stabbing Husband Over 200 Times: Rage Caused by Meds 
Violence Prozac* 2000-06-30 England *Woman Acquitted in Stabbing Incident 
Murder Prozac 1991-10-16 California *Woman Kills Her Mother: Given Only 3 Years in Prison Because of Testimony Using Prozac Defense 
Affair With Minor Effexor* 2011-02-05 Canada *Woman School Teacher Who Molested 15 Year Old Male Student Found Not Guilty: Effexor Insanity 
Murder Attempt Prozac 1998-10-13 Scotland *Woman Stabs Boyfriend: Used Prozac Defense: Placed on Probation 
Violence/Homicides SSRIs, SNRIs Antidepressants & Chantix 2010-12-15 Global ++ SSRIs & SNRIs, & Chantix, Have Highest Rate of Homicides/Violence of All Medications: PLoS 
Disinhibition/Can Lead to Violence SSRIs/Effexor & Alcohol 2009-06-15 Global ++ Violence As a Side Effect of Antidepressants: Provocation by Alcohol: Study 
Mania/Worsening Depression Antidepressants 2010-06-02 Global ++1 In 3 People Given A/D's May Become Worse: Then Diagnosed With So-Called Bipolar Disorder: Web MD 
Adverse Reaction SSRIs 2006-12-20 Global ++1 Preliminary Study: LSD & SSRIs Share Same Mechanism in Some Ways: U. of Arizona 
Worsening Depression & Suicidality SSRI Antidepressants 2010-04-09 Global ++13.5% on SSRIs Had Worsening Depression & Suicidality:Sharp Drop in Brain Activity Within 48 Hours 
Suicides/ Suicides Attempts/Addiction/Birth Defects Paxil 2010-03-08 U.S.A. ++150 Suicide Cases & 300 Suicide Attempts Settled: 3,200 Paxil Addictions Settled 
Heart Attacks Antidepressants 2010-06-14 Global ++18 Year Olds Diagnosed With Depression & Given A/D's More Likely To Die of Heart Attack at 55 
Mania & Psychosis Antidepressants 2004-02-02 U.S.A. ++200,000 a Year Enter Hospital Due to Antidepressant- Induced Mania/ Psychosis: FDA Testimony 
Mental Illness SSRIs & Other Psychiatric Meds 2010-04-14 U.S.A. ++35 Times as Many Children On Govt. Disability for Mental Illness Since Prozac Was Launched 
Mania Antidepressants 2006-11-28 U.S.A. ++4.8 Million Person Increase in Bipolar Disorder in Last


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Self-Prescribing Med For Depression 2009-11-08 U.S.A. ++43% of Psychiatrists Might Prescribe Antidepressant for Themselves:May Be Apropos to Fort Hood 
Alcohol Craving Zoloft 2004-07-14 Global ++45 Out of 100 Alcoholics Increased Their Drinking on Zoloft 
Deaths Wellbutrin* 2006-08-02 Washington DC ++468 Deaths Reported to FDA Thru 2003 : Freedom of Information 
Misdiagnosis Med For Depression 2008-03-25 Global ++60% of Bipolars Were First Diagnosed With Depression 
Not Recommended For Youth SSRIs 2008-11-12 U.S.A. ++74% of Youth Will Not Respond to SSRIs: CNS Response Data 
Suicidal Thoughts Antidepressants 2007-06-07 Global ++8.8% of Non-Suicidal People Had Suicidal Thoughts on Antidepressants 
Mania Med For Depression 2009-11-08 U.S.A. ++860,000 People Suffered Mania From Antidepressants in 2000: Most Not Hospitalized: Book Stats 
Mania/Bipolar SSRIs & All Antidepressants 2010-09-23 Global ++9 Out of 10 Bipolars Became This Way Through Antidepressant Induced Mania: Doctor Speaks 
Homicides Antidepressants 2011-08-02 Global ++A/D Induced Akathisia-Related Homicides & Genes of the CYP450 Family: Journal 
Worsening Condition Antidepressants 2010-10-25 Global ++A/D's Can Worsen Overall Condition of a Depressive Episode: Cause Mania: Research in Italy 
Ineffective Zoloft & All Antidepressants 2011-07-18 Global ++A/D's Ineffective for Depression In Alzheimer's Patients: Meta-Analysis From Australia 
Self-Mutilation Prozac 2000-05-07 Global ++According To Patent, Prozac, launched in Dec.1987, Causes Self-Mutilation 
Adverse Reactions & Cardiovasular Problems Meds For Depression 2011-09-12 Global ++Adding Another A/D to Existing A/D Produces Serious Problems & No Benefit 
Permanent Loss of Libido SSRI Antidepressants 2010-03-27 Global ++After Discontinuation, Many Patients Still Experience Low Libido: Journal Articleeoples Pharmacy 
Alcohol Abuse Effexor 2007-05-01 Global ++Alcohol Abuse & "Feeling Drunk" Listed as Side Effects in PDR 
Alcohol Abuse Paxil 2007-05-01 Global ++Alcohol Abuse is Listed as an Adverse Reaction to Paxil in the Insert 
Clinical Trial Manipulation Antidepressants 2010-04-02 Global ++All But 1 of 38 Positive Studies Published But Only 3 of 36 Negative Studies: AJP 
Violence & Murder SSRI Antidepressants 2011-07-04 Global ++Almost 11 Times More likely to Commit Violence/Murder while on SSRIs than on Other Drugs: Study 
Suicide/Impulsivity Antidepressants 2008-07-06 Global ++Almost One-Third of Suicides are Impulsive: Antidepressants Can Cause Impulsivity 
Worsening Depression Meds For Depression 2011-03-08 Global ++Antidepressant Treatment May Contribute to Chronic Depressive Syndrome: Journal of Psychosomatics 
Appear To Look Older Antidepressants 2009-02-04 Global ++Antidepressant Use Can Make People Look Older Than They Are: Also Causes Face Sagging: ASPS 
Bipolar Disorder Antidepressants 2010-04-28 U.S.A. ++Antidepressants & ADHD Meds Causing over 1 Million Young People to Be Diagnosed as Bipolar 

Mood Destabilization Antidepressants 2008-03-04 Global ++Antidepressants Cause Rapid Cycling & Mood Destabilization in Bipolar Disorder: Am J Psychiatry


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

I have lots more but you get the idea.

Probably not.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 19, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



He was never given an order by the police.  The primary act that ended up with Martin being shot was when he returned to confront Zimmerman.  You will say I don't know that he returned to confront Zimmerman, but he'd run out of sight of Zimmerman (from the 911 tape) and had time to return to his father's girlfriend's townhouse, yet ended up in the confrontation.

You show your ignorance with your name calling and implications (btw, apparently he was found to have no fault in the "subsequent shit) and again your argument fails.  

Again, the best advice I can give you is to "shoo".


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Which would not accomplish your goal. 

That new provision of the law would be challenged and invalidated as a violation of the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment, in addition to being a Second Amendment violation. 

A citizen's civil liberties cant be restricted absent due process, where the burden rests most heavily on the state to justify that restriction, not on the citizen.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 19, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> He was out there trolling for trouble. He thought Martin was suspicious because he was walking down the street and was convinced Martin was a "asshole" when Martin had done nothing.  If he had minded his own business, nothing would have happened.
> 
> The dispatcher told him not to follow.
> 
> ...



It's official...you are not an honest poster.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



If you had 100 mental health professionals sign off that someone is mentally ill, that would still be in violation of the Constitution absent due process. 

Obviously the evidence and testimony of mental health professionals could be brought before a judge in the context of a competency hearing, where the citizen whose civil rights are in jeopardy could also provide evidence in his defense. Only after a judge has determined that someone is indeed mentally incompetent can his right to own a firearm be denied. 

Guns used in violent crimes is not an access to guns problem, its a mental health problem, and the problem will continue as long as we as a society refuse to take seriously the issue of mental illness in America.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



There are alcohol consumption related prohibitions ?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Guns used in violent crimes is not an access to guns problem, its a mental health problem, and the problem will continue as long as we as a society refuse to take seriously the issue of mental illness in America.



Exactly its a mental health problem.

One's with the mental health problems should = no guns.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> I have lots more but you get the idea.
> 
> Probably not.



Provided you get the idea that all that evidence is meaningless absent due process.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



There is no Constitutional right to purchase or consume alcohol, there is a Constitutional right to own a firearm.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Guns used in violent crimes is not an access to guns problem, its a mental health problem, and the problem will continue as long as we as a society refuse to take seriously the issue of mental illness in America.
> ...



after due process


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 19, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



It's still a wonder to me how naive you people are.

I bet you think OJ was telling the truth too.

Zimmerman was looking for trouble.  He found it. Martin shares part of the blame too.  You're a fucking moron if you think that Zimmerman was an innocent victim here.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 19, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Total strawman argument. Not everyone who uses a gun to commit a crime has a mental health problem. Anyone who thinks they need an assault weapon has a mental health problem though.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



What about people who think they need a semiautomatic rifle?

After all what you call an assault rifle is really just a semiautomatic rifle with some cosmetic doodads on it.

BTW murders committed with rifles of any kind still amount to less than those committed with hands and feet or blunt objects and knives alone are used in almost 5 times more murders than rifles of any kind.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



There alcohol related prohibitions on owning a firearm.

And other drugs too

I WAS WRONG ON edit gca IS JUST DRUGS


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Those were only school shootings under you pre-determined search parameters


Parameters...based on your argument.
I asked you how many school shootings over the last 10 years involved the drugs you're talking about.   You came back with 13.
How many people. over the last 10 years, have taken the drugs under dioscussion?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


There is no such thing, save for alcohol-related felony convictions that deny the right based on the fact that a felony was committed, not the use of alcohol.

You can own and comsume as much alcohol as you want and still own as many guns as you want.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Thank you for helping to prove the premise that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotiuon, ignorance and/or dishonesty.


----------



## Geaux4it (Jan 19, 2014)

I just can't seem to think of a down side. A bummer would be all the paper work one would have to do if shots were fired. At least your up right and breathing to tell about it.

-Geaux


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Yes


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Those were only school shootings under you pre-determined search parameters
> ...



My premise wasn't only school shooters.


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 19, 2014)




----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


And so, you should have said "There are NO alcohol related prohibitions on owning a firearm."


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Sigh.
How many school shootings and other violant acts agians others over the last 10 years involved the drugs you're talking about?
How many people. over the last 10 years, have taken the drugs under dioscussion?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Did you see my edit ?

4473 says controlled substances.

GCA68 limits the Controlled Substances


----------



## westwall (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...









Really?  Where is that disorder described in the DSM V?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Sigh.  Hundreds have direct correlation.  See previous exhaustive lists posted.

I can post more.

Why are you so hell bent on protecting the rights of a mental cases at the jeopardy of yours ?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...




Under treatment does not mean taking drugs. Even if it did, she was going through a bitter divorce and filed court documents that claimed her ex was not assisting in providing for the children, and that he was going as far as to hoard supplies so that the kids did not even have toilet paper. Unless you want to argue that the drugs caused the divorce you are going to have a hard time blaming this on drugs.

Or guns.


----------



## westwall (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...








We aren't.  We're concerned with the due process aspect.  And of course the ease with which progressives toss out mental health claims with anyone who disagrees with them.

The Soviet Union, and other collectivist countries, are replete with people in "mental health"(i.e. the Gulag) institutions with some sort of malady for no reason other than the authorities didn't like what they were saying.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Not one bit. You want to prevent the possibility of a behavior that increases the possibility of harm. Which is typical thinking for a coward like you.



OODA_Loop said:


> You lack the wherewithal and capacity to realize it.



I see it for exactly what it is; fear of the remote possibility of danger and the victimization of whole categories of people for the misbehavior of a few.



OODA_Loop said:


> You're closing with a juvenile name calling is proof.



No name calling; I was being descriptive and accurate.



OODA_Loop said:


> Evolution has not been your friend.



Well, I can see it wasn't a friend for you ancestors, lol.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


I want a number, and I want verification that it was related to one of the drugs under discussion.
Then I want a verifiable number of people who have been prescribed these drungs under the last 10 years.
Why?
It's the only chance you have of showing that these people are a threat sufficient to have their right restricted.  Iif you cannot give those numbers, then there's no chance of a reasonable, rational  person conclusding that your argument holdis any water.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Guns used in violent crimes is not an access to guns problem, its a mental health problem, and the problem will continue as long as we as a society refuse to take seriously the issue of mental illness in America.
> ...



Because crazy people have no rights.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



He keeps slipping up and saying what he really MEANS, lol.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



So what to attribute killing her children in their beds and herself to the humidity ?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



You just said that every cop in America is crazy.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Because everyones rights are inalienable, and cannot be preempted absent due process. 

If one believes someone is mentally ill and shouldnt be in possession of firearms, fine; but that must first be proven at hearing before a judge.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Certainly they have rights,  I am arguing for their right to not own a gun.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Thus far, you have not presented a sound reason that they should be denied.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



If that were true they would ban those drugs. The mere fact that they haven't done so is absolute proof that the science proves you wrong.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Because everyones rights are inalienable, and cannot be preempted absent due process.
> 
> If one believes someone is mentally ill and shouldnt be in possession of firearms, fine; but that must first be proven at hearing before a judge.



You can do things which forfeit your rights.

You can use controlled substances = no gun per GCA.

Add these drugs to controlled substances.

Done,


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Didn't you mock an organization earlier that wants to do just that ?

Well yes you did.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



LEt me think.

She was awarded the house because she managed to prove that her husband emotionally abused her, and her children, for years. She filed numerous complaints that he wasn't paying child support, or anything else, so she had financial problems on top of the emotional ones that come about after years of torture. The government, despite the beliefs of idiots that it can fix everything, was powerless to enforce even the most basic orders that they handed down.

You are right, it has to be the gun, nothing else could possibly be at fault.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



In your eyes.


----------



## Darkwind (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...


NO it isn't.  But you knew that.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



No you are not, you are arguing for your privilege to decide who is, and is not, crazy.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Because everyones rights are inalienable, and cannot be preempted absent due process.
> ...



All of those things require a judge to rule that the state made its case. You want to take that away from the judges and reserve it for yourself.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



No, I mocked you for citing that organization. Learn the difference.

For the record, I mostly support that organization, and am half tempted to turn them loose on you. They would be right here arguing that anyone who takes those drugs has the same right to won a firearm as anyone who doesn't, a fact they make perfectly clear on their website.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



1000's of nasty divorces don't end with killing children.

The change of brain chemistry make thoughts and rationale to do so seem justified.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Or any other reasonable, rational person - and until you show the % of people on these drugs who have acted violently against others because of them, you never will.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



It just requires a check mark on 4473 ?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



That number doesn't exist.

Just list, after list, after list of violent crimes committed by some who do.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

10. Desvenlafaxine (Pristiq) An antidepressant which affects both serotonin and noradrenaline, this drug is 7.9 times more likely to be associated with violence than other drugs.

 9. Venlafaxine (Effexor) A drug related to Pristiq in the same class of antidepressants, both are also used to treat anxiety disorders. Effexor is 8.3 times more likely than other drugs to be related to violent behavior. (More on Time.com: Adderall May Not Make You Smarter, But It Makes You Think You Are)


8. Fluvoxamine (Luvox) An antidepressant that affects serotonin (SSRI), Luvox is 8.4 times more likely than other medications to be linked with violence

7. Triazolam (Halcion) A benzodiazepine which can be addictive, used to treat insomnia. Halcion is 8.7 times more likely to be linked with violence than other drugs, according to the study. 

6) Atomoxetine (Strattera) Used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Strattera affects the neurotransmitter noradrenaline and is 9 times more likely to be linked with violence compared to the average medication.

5) Mefoquine (Lariam) A treatment for malaria, Lariam has long been linked with reports of bizarre behavior. It is 9.5 times more likely to be linked with violence than other drugs. 

4) Amphetamines: (Various) Amphetamines are used to treat ADHD and affect the brain&#8217;s dopamine and noradrenaline systems. They are 9.6 times more likely to be linked to violence, compared to other drugs.

3) Paroxetine (Paxil) An SSRI antidepressant, Paxil is also linked with more severe withdrawal symptoms and a greater risk of birth defects compared to other medications in that class. It is 10.3 times more likely to be linked with violence compared to other drugs. (More on Time.com: Healthland&#8217;s Guide to Life 2011)


2) Fluoxetine (Prozac) The first well-known SSRI antidepressant, Prozac is 10.9 times more likely to be linked with violence in comparison with other medications.

1) Varenicline (Chantix) The anti-smoking medication Chantix affects the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, which helps reduce craving for smoking. Unfortunately, it&#8217;s 18 times more likely to be linked with violence compared to other drugs &#8212; by comparison, that number for Xyban is 3.9 and just 1.9 for nicotine replacement. Because Chantix is slightly superior in terms of quit rates in comparison to other drugs, it shouldn&#8217;t necessarily be ruled out as an option for those trying to quit, however.


Read more: Top Ten Legal Drugs Linked to Violence | TIME.com Top Ten Legal Drugs Linked to Violence | TIME.com


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Dr. Peter Breggin: Antidepressants Cause Suicide and Violence in Soldiers


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Japan Revises SSRI Warnings--Hostility, Violence - Medical News Today


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Teenager bludgeoned his father to death after GP prescribed him Prozac | Mail Online

A teenager bludgeoned his father to death with a hammer and crowbar weeks after a GP prescribed him the controversial anti-depressant Prozac.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...death-GP-prescribed-Prozac.html#ixzz2qsh3HyLr 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

The findings indicated a significant negative association between lethal violence (homicide and suicide) and prescription of antidepressants in the Netherlands, indicating that in a period in which the exposure of the Dutch population to antidepressants increased, rates of lethal violence decreased.

Antidepressants and lethal violence in the Netherlands 1994?2008


----------



## Where_r_my_Keys (Jan 19, 2014)

I couldn't post the OP, because it had a link in it.  But this post answers the original post.

As I see it, this is less a mental health issue and more an issue of morality.

The individual in question, set his desires over the very life of the person he murdered.

As I see it, the problem begins and ends with the cultural manipulation by the Ideological Left, which has done its best to rinse every since of morality from western culture.

I believe that one need look no farther than the foundation of the Left to see why, to the individual, the adherents of the Left reject soundly reasoned cultural mores and standards and why, as a result, the cultures infected by the Left quickly succumb to higher crime, deepseated poverty and malaise in general.

Socialism rests upon Relativism.

Relativism rejects objectivity.

Objectivity is essential to vital concepts such as truth, trust, justice and morality.

It's as simple as that.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Because everyones rights are inalienable, and cannot be preempted absent due process.
> ...



You dont understand. 

The issue has nothing to do with a mentally ill person conceding a mental illness and being disallowed a firearm accordingly. 

The issue has to do with the fact that a person who suffers from a mental illness, prior to being committed or otherwise compelled to sustain treatment against his will, has the right to hear the evidence against him, and present evidence of his own in his defense to be evaluated by a neutral magistrate. 

The validity or merits of the evidence youve presented isnt being contested. 

What is being contested is your incorrect position that simply because someone has been diagnosed with a particular mental illness, he should be summarily disallowed a firearm absent due process.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> What is being contested is your incorrect position that simply because someone has been diagnosed with a particular mental illness, he should be summarily disallowed a firearm absent due process.



Not diagnosed with a particular illness.

Taking particular drugs.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



First, you have no evidence she was taking any drugs. Second, unless you can prove that every other nasty divorce that ended like this involved involved drugs, which would require a time machine so that the drugs could be sent back through time to the people that did this before these drugs existed, all you are doing is making my point for me.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > What is being contested is your incorrect position that simply because someone has been diagnosed with a particular mental illness, he should be summarily disallowed a firearm absent due process.
> ...



What is being contested, then, is your incorrect position that simply because someone is taking particular drugs, he should be summarily disallowed a firearm absent due process.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



This 4473? The one that asks if you have ever been adjudicated mentally deficient or committed to a mental institution? And then defines both of those as having been determined by a court? And then further states that, if that determination was set aside that you can still own a firearm? Is that what you are talking about in an attempt to prove I don't know what I am talking about?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



If she was taking drugs, and the indications fit, under my plan she wouldn't have the gun to kill her kids or you or your kids.

Win.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



With drug use and check mark = no gun.

No adjudication required = my point.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Why not ?  Other drug use will do that ?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



She would, however, still have a car, and knives, and an entire house full of dangerous chemicals.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Actually, that is my point, you want to take away people rights based on your inability to prove that the drugs are dangerous.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



No it will not. In order to be denied a gun you have to be convicted of a felony, and even that doesn't automatically strip you of the right to own a gun.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Can't stop everything.

I'll take my chance against her with dangerous chemicals.


----------



## Where_r_my_Keys (Jan 19, 2014)

Ownership and the effective use of a firearm in defense of your life or the life of another in your immediate presence is an alienable right of every individual.  

Even the Europeans... despite their having turned from their natural rights.

That someone is sick and 'shouldn't have a gun' is between them and the individual who is threatened by such.  No matter how ya cut this, whoever the individual is, their interests would be well served where they have taken seriously their responsibility to arm themselves and to become proficient in the use of that (those) firearm(s).

It amuses me to no end, to watch people cry about how dangerous people are so willing to harm others because those people are an inconvenience to them, even as they demand that we disarm ourselves, to our own detriment, to make them feel better about themselves.  (See any traits that look familiar in that advocacy?)


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...




Sure it will.

Check you are user of certain drugs on the 4473 and come home empty handed.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Incorrect. 

Youre still not understanding. 

It doesnt make any difference whether one answers yes or no to question 11 f on the 4473. 

When the FFL runs the background check through the database, that the buyer was adjudicated mentally ill or incompetent will show up in the search, and the FFL will be told the buyer isnt eligible to purchase a firearm. 

The record of mental illness may be placed in the database *only after* due process has been exhausted.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



- Or dishonorably discharged from military
- User of certain drugs
- Restraining order
- Misdemeanor of domestic violence
- Renounced Citizenship


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Yes, because chlorine and hydrazine are so much less dangerous than guns.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



You have the wrong question.

11e


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



When chlorine and hydrazine become and issue we can tighten those up to.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



The one that asks about stimulants and depressants?

Problem solved.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Yep add the reuptake inhibitors to that list.

Solve-o el problemo


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



The only issue right now is your pathetic attempt to use fake science to justify your crusade against people who seek help.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



People who need help.

Don't need guns.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Fake science.

Come on now.

The correlation is not fake.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 19, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



Deflecting and saying that more people catch a cold than get shot is totally irrelevant.
Nobody needs a semi-automatic weapon, only crazy people think they do.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Because crazy people have no rights.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Correlation is not science.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Only crazy people think only crazy people need a semi automatic weapon.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Crazy people should not have a right to guns.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



And if one is indeed mentally ill, or taking certain drugs per your stipulations, and has *not* been adjudicated mentally ill or incompetent, and checks no to questions 11 e and f, hell come home with a firearm.   

Moreover, question 11 e asks if one is an unlawful user of certain drugs; if one is taking drugs for his mental illness per a doctors orders, he is not an unlawful user.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Can you explain why someone who prefers to avoid crowds shouldn't have a gun?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Right expand 11e pharmaceutical disqualifications.  Amend GCA.

Call it:

Sane Firearms Owners Protection Act


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Are they taking one of the reuptake inhibitors or other drug with black box FDA warning ?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



People with a low IQ shouldn't have guns either, or is it ok to be a retard and own a gun?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Only if adjudicated mentally incompetent.

Which some are.

It is care giver decision.

I, as an FFL, would not sell to retarded person.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Just make people pass an IQ test before buying a gun. That would eliminate 50% of the people! then eliminate all the drug and alcohol users. That'll do it.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...




They must be able to fill out a 4473 and understand it .....that is IQ test enough.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Because everyones rights are inalienable, and cannot be preempted absent due process.
> ...



That doesn't make it right or Constitutional, a couple of things you don't give a shit about, just like your neighbors.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



It is Constitutional and in force.

On patrol, off my property with a CCW is not caring about your neighbors. 

Its stupid

Ask George Zimmerman


----------



## westwall (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...








Sounds GREAT!  I think you should have to pass a IQ test to vote too!  And you have to own property as well.  Property owners pay taxes while welfare people don't.  That sounds like a GREAT idea.


----------



## Where_r_my_Keys (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



So true.  Given the state of the military art, what the individual needs, to fulfill their responsibility to sustain freedom, is a fully automatic rifle, preferrably chambered in a large caliber, minimally, third of an inch and charged to provide supersonic muzzle velocities... precisely accurate to a minimum of 500 yards.

Remember that the right stems from the responsibility to remain free, so as to be better able to fulfill one's life and destroying tyrannical governments requires top draw equipment.  The 2nd amendment speaks to this where in its foundational basis, speaks to 'a well regulated militia'.


----------



## Where_r_my_Keys (Jan 19, 2014)

westwall said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Indeed... it is absurd that those without property holdings, meaning people with no vested interest in the nation, beyond their being present, would ever be allowed anywhere near a voting booth.  

This one change, alone, would increase prosperity across the board, by leaving political concerns to those who possess legitimate means to have 'concerns'.


----------



## Where_r_my_Keys (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



True.  I've long said that anyone who advocates for unsustainable notions, should be taken from the general population.  Those sufficiently cognizant can be used as servants, given room and board, but those of insufficient cognitive means should be destroyed, with their remains fed to support livestock or fertilizer.

This way, the species remains viable, given the removal of the ideological left from the political equation.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I wish you would stake out a position, and stick to it. First it was any drug with a black box warning, which is a term that doesn't make sense outside your head, then you switched it to drugs with homicidal or suicidal ideation, now it is reuptake inhibitors or the fictional black box warnings. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that SSRIs cause any of the things you are going apeshit about, and all the non scientific evidence says that it happens to young people, not mature adults. Maybe you should talk to your doctor about getting a prescription.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Bullshit, prove that it is constitutional to take away someone's gun rights because they took meds prescribed by a doctor that *might* cause bad side effects.



OODA_Loop said:


> On patrol, off my property with a CCW is not caring about your neighbors.
> 
> Its stupid
> 
> Ask George Zimmerman



You mean the GZ that stopped the robberies in his neighborhood because he looked out for his friends and neighbors?

Yeah, I would like to shake his hand, but I wouldn't waste spit on you, dumbass.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



There is nothing on that form that requires the person who signs it to have even read it, much less requiring them to fill it out and understand it.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



The black box warning = _May Cause Suicidal or Homicidal Ideation._

The reuptake inhibitors of all flavors have the black box warning.

Notice how I said reuptake inhibitors or other drug with black box FDA warning.

There is evidence, thus the black box warning.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



I admitted there was evidence, hence the non scientific.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You certify that you *read and understand* the 4473........ its right there on the form ?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Yeah and*may* does not mean *will*, so fuck off, you are not taking anyone's guns just because the Future Crime division thinks that there is a +4% chance I might could do something bad in someone's opinion, you fucking fascist idjit.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



FDA is not science-based ?


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 19, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



"May" is close enough when we are talking suicide or homicide.

It is not like we are talking about it may cause drowsiness.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


It most certainly does, and it is extraordinarily dishonest of your to say otherwise - you simply take the number of people who have so acted and divide by the number of people so medicated.

Of course we both know you won't provide this number because you know it renders your argument unsound.

I therefore accept your concession of the point.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Read more: Top Ten Legal Drugs Linked to Violence | TIME.com Top Ten Legal Drugs Linked to Violence | TIME.com


As you cannot show the % of people who comiitted an act of violence against others while on these meds, your post is meaningless.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Dr. Peter Breggin: Antidepressants Cause Suicide and Violence in Soldiers


As you cannot show the % of people who comiitted an act of violence against others while on these meds, your post is meaningless.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Teenager bludgeoned his father to death after GP prescribed him Prozac | Mail Online
> 
> A teenager bludgeoned his father to death with a hammer and crowbar weeks after a GP prescribed him the controversial anti-depressant Prozac.
> 
> ...


As you cannot show the % of people who comiitted an act of violence against others while on these meds, your post is meaningless.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> The findings indicated a significant negative association between lethal violence (homicide and suicide) and prescription of antidepressants in the Netherlands, indicating that in a period in which the exposure of the Dutch population to antidepressants increased, rates of lethal violence decreased.
> 
> Antidepressants and lethal violence in the Netherlands 1994?2008


As you cannot show the % of people who comiitted an act of violence against others while on these meds, your post is meaningless.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


As you cannot show the % of people who comiitted an act of violence against others while on these meds, you cannot show any correlation exists..


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 19, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...


Thank you for continuing to help prove the premise that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 20, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



There is nothing crazy about owning a semi auto rifle. There is something crazy about comparing catching a cold to being stabbed though.

Most rifles owned are semi automatic and yet rifles account for 5 times less murder than knives.  Seems to me using your logic that people who own knives are 5 times crazier than people who own rifles.

 And Do you even know what a semi auto is?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 20, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



But they look so mean and evil.......and they get gun grabbing fascists votes in idiocracies like Kali-phornica.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 20, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Shit we just ought to let these idiots have their circle jerk.

It's a waste of time talking to fucking morons.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 20, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Read somewhere that on average there are five to twenty lurkers for every poster on a message board thread.

So do it for the lurkers to the point that you are not chasing your own tail, if you need a reason.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 20, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > The findings indicated a significant negative association between lethal violence (homicide and suicide) and prescription of antidepressants in the Netherlands, indicating that in a period in which the exposure of the Dutch population to antidepressants increased, rates of lethal violence decreased.
> ...



You can't show which ones did it because of the drugs or which ones did it because of the illness they'r taking the drugs for or both.

If you're a mental case and taking mental case drugs.....NO GUN.

*Its coming.*

And more and more law abiding gun owners who aren't sick in the head and need drugs to function in society support it.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 20, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



right now according to this site there are 

127 members and 826 guests


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 20, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



That's pretty much what I was talking about......


----------



## Geaux4it (Jan 20, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Agent provocateur


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 20, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...


Must be freaking you out that you can't shoot them.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jan 20, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...


Irrelevant to your position, and so, meaningless to the discussion.

You CAN show the % of people who comiitted an act of violence against others while on these meds; without such a figure, your position is meaningless.

Well, I mean it -can- be shown - you just refuse to do so because it destroys your argument.

You reek of fail.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 20, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



And freaking you out that you cant blow them.


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 20, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



Not irrelevant.

No way to tell if it was the drugs, underlying condition or both.  Lanza kills 20 children....... was it his condition or the dr_ugs for his condition that have a warning on them about homicidal thoughts or both ?_

1000's of acts with these drugs in their system.  1000's

All of which are sufficient grounds for: *no guns for crazies.*

I can't see for the life of me why you would jeopardize the rights of the sane for the perceived affront on the rights of the mentally ill.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jan 20, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Perhaps you could explain the mechanics of what you advocate. 

For example, lets assume an individual is diagnosed with one of the mental illnesses youve noted and is prescribed the medication you maintain will result in another Sandy Hook. 

What happens next? 

Does the doctor prescribing the medication get on the phone to the local authorities so they can search the individuals home for guns, confiscating any firearms found? 

How can the authorities justify the search and confiscation without violating the 4th and 5th Amendments? 

How will the authorities notify gun dealers in the area to not sell guns to this individual if hes not in the NICS database because hes not been convicted of a crime?


----------



## Where_r_my_Keys (Jan 20, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



You may be missing the point here.  They don't give a damn about the Constitution, individual rights are whatever they say individual rights are.  And rest assured that each one of them are excluding themselves from the same principle, where they may find themselves in a similar position.

Let's change the topic from the dangers of "GUNS!" and the dangers of the public advocacy of a dangerous, destructive set of ideas.  We'll call the destructive set of ideas "Socialism".

Assume for the sake of argument that some group comes to power and decides that the principle which holds that 'rights are whatever we say they are', provides them with the justification to forbid socialists from publicly advocating socialism.

Consider for just a moment what those here, advocating to usurp the rights of others, 'for all the right reasons', would have to say about that.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 20, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Crazy people should have the right to residential treatment  or quality healthcare of a permanent nature.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 20, 2014)

In my opinion crazy people are not nearly as dangerous as people who would deny Constitutional rights without due process-which is also a Constitutional right.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 20, 2014)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



It won't work. He wants to prevent people with shingles or diabetes that take Lyrica for the pain from having a gun because he believes that immunizations cause autism.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 20, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



Even if they don't want it.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 21, 2014)

OODA_Loop said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > OODA_Loop said:
> ...



There are millions of people on medication for depression and none of them except a very few have committed mass murders, and for that you want to make them all defenseless.

As I have said, you are a fascist.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 21, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



And a lot of those people on antidepressants take them for reason other than depression.
Antidepressants for More than Depression


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 21, 2014)

M14 Shooter said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Thanks for proving my point.

Btw, what do sane people need a semi for? Shoot the whole herd of deer all at once?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Have you ever even been hunting?

By your idiotic statements I'd have to say no.


----------



## Geaux4it (Jan 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



No.

-Geaux


----------



## gipper (Jan 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Why do people like want to impose your beliefs on others?  This desire to use government, which is force, to force people to live by your rules, is disgusting and anti-American.  

We once had a free country.  Then the nation became infected with liberalism...and all liberty is lost.  

Amazingly those on the left fail to see the danger in all of this.  How can they be so blind?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 21, 2014)

gipper said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



The US was never free, there have always been lots of rules and laws... And the government is spying on you as well. More guns = more gun deaths. But I guess that's what you want.


----------



## Geaux4it (Jan 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Acceptable risk to have the honor of living in the US

-Geaux


----------



## OODA_Loop (Jan 21, 2014)

After thinking it over perhaps I was wrong and overzealous. I will no longer post here.  Mods please terminate my account.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 21, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Actually, if they are a danger to themselves or others, then yes.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 21, 2014)

Geaux4it said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > gipper said:
> ...


^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



All you've done there is show why I feel you're not worth having a discussion with, so thanks for that.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



More gun deaths = fewer rapes and assaults.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 21, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



The only way you can prove they are a danger is if they commit a crime.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 22, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



A mental health professional's evaluation would do a better job than waiting got him to commit a crime.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 22, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



Except that isn't all that accurate. The reason for that is pretty simple, they are guessing.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 23, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



Oh, you mean like that Army mental health professional who shot so many of his fellow soldiers?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 23, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > gipper said:
> ...



More gun deaths = less idiots with guns.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 23, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



I'd accept that if a person appears to be a danger to himself or others, that person should be committed until there's no question.  Then, if there's no danger, they get released and their rights restored.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 23, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



He wasn't mentally ill.  He is a terrorist.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 24, 2014)

hunarcy said:


> 9thIDdoc said:
> 
> 
> > hunarcy said:
> ...



True but he's also not someone I'd trust making arbitrary decisions about someone's rights. A psychiatric opinion is just that; an *opinion*. And 5 different psychiatrists may have 5 different opinions about a person's mental condition. That's why the last word is, and should be, up to a court as is required by due process.


----------



## Where_r_my_Keys (Jan 24, 2014)

Take from the equation, the population centers which have been governed by Socialism for a generation or more and Gun deaths are irrelevant.  

That tells us that THE PROBLEM is not Guns, but people who have been 'taught' collectivism.  They lack the slightest understanding that their rights are sustained ONLY by their bearing the correlating responsibilities.  They have been taught by decades of subjective governance, wherein the rules change when it suits the socialist authorities.  

What's more, the highest crime rates in the nation, have consistently been realized in the population centers, with the most stringent restrictions on the ownership and use of firearms.

This is not even a debatable point.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 25, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> hunarcy said:
> 
> 
> > 9thIDdoc said:
> ...



How does being a terrorist invalidate his professional psychiatric opinion?  

I do support having a judge involved in the commitment process.  That's a due process requirement.  But, I DON'T think it should be as difficult as it's been made to get people into facilities where they can be treated and not living on the street or at home where they're a threat to themselves and everyone around them.


----------



## protectionist (Jan 25, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



As if redcoats and Indians were all we might have to defend ourselves from, right ?  What a stupid post.


----------



## Politico (Jan 26, 2014)

Still no downside.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 26, 2014)

protectionist said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


At the time, yes. So tell me Einstein, what are you needing to protect yourself from these days with a militia?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 26, 2014)

Militia?

A carry permit has nothing to do with militia.

Every person has the right to defend themselves.  A firearm is the most effective tool for that purpose.

It's a concept that even a simpleton like you should be able to understand.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 26, 2014)

not a chance of it


----------



## protectionist (Jan 26, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



There's lots we need to protect ourselves from with and without a militia.  Common street criminals, goofball kids who never got taught that attacking someone is a crime, Muslim jihadist lunatics, occasionally dangerous animals, and half the countries in the world who would overthrow us if they could.

What's the matter you couldn't figure this out, without a tutor ?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 26, 2014)

protectionist said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



So you admit that you no longer need a well-regulated militia? If you think you still need one, then, for what purpose?

There, is that simple enough for you? Or should I dumb down my questions even more?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jan 26, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Federal law mandates a militia, end of your attempt to argue against guns because the militia no longer exists.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 26, 2014)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



That ignorant troll not only can't make a real argument, it doesn't even know what "well regulated" means.  And, the issue isn't whether we need a well regulated militia, it's that we have it and it is the general population.


----------



## PredFan (Jan 26, 2014)

There is no downside to carrying a firearm.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Jan 26, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Actually there are many militias around most just don't advertise for obvious reasons.
But that is entirely beside the point because the right to keep and bear arms is an individual one and has been ruled so by SCUS. "Need" is also beside the point because individual rights exist without any necessity to prove "need". Are we required to prove we need to speak our mind (free speech)? Should I be disallowed the ownership of a fire extinguisher when I have no fire to extinguish or tire tools because I do not have a flat tire? I don't think so.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 26, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> Actually there are many militias around most just don't advertise for obvious reasons.
> But that is entirely beside the point because the right to keep and bear arms is an individual one and has been ruled so by SCUS. "Need" is also beside the point because individual rights exist without any necessity to prove "need". Are we required to prove we need to speak our mind (free speech)? Should I be disallowed the ownership of a fire extinguisher when I have no fire to extinguish or tire tools because I do not have a flat tire? I don't think so.



Well said and exactly right!


----------



## Spoonman (Jan 26, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



if you actually had a clue what you were talking about, weren't blindly pushing an agenda and bothered to find out what the real intent of the militia described in the 2nd amendment was really for, you will realize that militia is needed now more than any time in our history.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 27, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



Why? I don't even see a "well-regulated militia" between civilian gun owners these days.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 27, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



The dude is a Tar Baby, so I wouldn't expect much more from him than the stupid off-the-cuff remarks he has been making this far.

The guy is a real imbecile.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 27, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...


I'm an imbecile yet you can't answer my question, and just throw out schoolyard insults. YAWN! So what does that make you if you are unable to answer an imbecile's question?


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 27, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> if you actually had a clue what you were talking about, weren't blindly pushing an agenda and bothered to find out what the real intent of the militia described in the 2nd amendment was really for, you will realize that militia is needed now more than any time in our history.



If he could do those things, he wouldn't be a troll.  Don't set the bar too high.


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 27, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spoonman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Owning a firearm has nothing to do with a militia.

The Constitution clearly states 



> the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed



The militia was secondary to the right to keep and bear arms not primary.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 27, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spoonman said:
> ...



Ok, so we can take the militia part out of the Constitution? Let's ask the NRA. 
And that doesn't seem to give unlimited powers so as to be impossible to restrict gun sales in any meaningful way, because otherwise you should be able to buy ANY "arms", all the way up to nukes. It just says you can own a gun. And strangely, it seems to be saying that you can't infringe on ANYONE'S right to own a gun, even criminals, the mentally insane and all the other undesirable people you wouldn't want packing?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 27, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You don't have to take it out.

And don't be a fucking idiot with the nuclear weapon shit.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 27, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Why not nukes? Otherwise, your rights would be infringed upon, wouldn't they? Or do you agree that some limits are ok?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 27, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Run along now little Boy.

Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.

This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 27, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



You agree that some limits are ok. That's cool. 

And aren't mental cases 2nd Amendment rights being violated with background mental health checks?


.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 27, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Speaking of mental health checks. How are you doing today?


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 29, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



I'm fine. Now please address my comment... if you can.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 29, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...


Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Oh I can and have already commented on it. 

Look no further than D.C. v. Heller.

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You're assuming the military would side with the government and not the Constitution and "we the people".


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Hey Idiot let's get this straight 

I have never once in any post talked about taking down the government.

My only concern is self defense and allowing people the absolute inalienable right to protect their own lives or the lives of their loved ones from those that would do them harm.

A firearm whether it be a shotgun rifle or handgun is THE most effective tool for that.  

Period, end of story.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 29, 2014)

Spiderman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...


You defend the 2nd for any reason, you're defending all of it.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 29, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



So if they do side with the government, the tyranny continues until you get nukes and take them out.


----------



## Lonestar_logic (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



If you think the military will not keep the oath they pledged then you are a dumbass.

While the oath does contain a pledge to obey the orders of the President and of commanding officers, that is still preceded by a pledge to defend the Constitution, and is also qualified by the requirement that such orders be  according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.    Any order, by anyone, that is not constitutional or according to regulations, is unlawful and military personnel are not obligated to follow such orders  and, in fact, are obligated to refuse.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Lonestar_logic said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Lol, if you think anyone would ever use nukes on their own countrymen you are as dumb as a sack of bricks.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 29, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



The FFs thought that you might need to fight the government, and if not on equal terms, then how? I guess you're smarter than they are.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



If it ever came to a shooting revolt, using a nuke to 'save' the country would be stupid and typically libtard thing to do, as you guys are so enamored of massive bloodshed, from the Jacobins to Pol Pot.

A shooting war would be won by us only if the LEOs and former military agreed that there was no other option, not at the ballot box not by waiting them out and breeding our way to a win.

It would be over within a month, just like the Soviet Union, and not one used nukes either, did they, idiot.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Jan 29, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



You could nuke Washington DC and cripple the government VERY badly in one shot. Geez, I hope you guys have some better military minds then what I'm seeing on this board, if not you folks are in trouble!


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



And kill millions of innocent people, but we know that doesn't matter to fascists like you or any of the other libtard dictators for the last two centuries.



Bumberclyde said:


> Geez, I hope you guys have some better military minds then what I'm seeing on this board, if not you folks are in trouble!



I find you lack of discernment reassuring.

Thank God you don't see how it works, it proves it fool proof, lol.


----------



## Defiant1 (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



You do realize that even if there wasn't a 2nd amendment that the people in this country would still have the right to keep and bear arms?


----------



## Spiderman (Jan 29, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> Spiderman said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



I only care about the shall not be infringed part.

What on earth do you have against people being able to defend themselves with the most effective tool?


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 31, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Lonestar_logic said:
> ...



In other words, it's fine to regulate people based on behavior.


----------



## hunarcy (Jan 31, 2014)

Lonestar_logic said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



Sadly, the poor troll doesn't know the difference between arms and ordinance.


----------



## JoeBlam (Jan 31, 2014)

JimH52 said:


> Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
> 
> It is more of a mental health issue.  This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit.  Pretty sad



Sad?  Anybody texting in a theatre deserves to be shot....twice.....always double-tap.


----------



## percysunshine (Jan 31, 2014)

*'The downside of carrying a firearm...'*


You have no idea how to use it.







The PJ Tatler » PHOTO: Wendy Davis Awkwardly Holds Ann Richards? Shotgun For Some Reason


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 1, 2014)

percysunshine said:


> *'The downside of carrying a firearm...'*
> 
> 
> You have no idea how to use it.
> ...



At least someone was smart enough to hand it to her open so everyone could see it's unloaded.  I seriously doubt she'd think to check.


----------



## Synthaholic (Feb 11, 2014)

So much for the argument that *"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"*.

This guy was a good guy with a gun - a retired officer.

Another complete failure for the Gun Nut Lobby.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Feb 11, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> So much for the argument that *"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"*.
> 
> This guy was a good guy with a gun - a retired officer.
> 
> Another complete failure for the Gun Nut Lobby.



So you believe retired officers can't be bad guys? Not too bright are ya?


----------



## Politico (Feb 12, 2014)

Defiant1 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > Spiderman said:
> ...



No they wouldn't. Just look at other countries where they didn't have one.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 12, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> So much for the argument that *"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"*.
> 
> This guy was a good guy with a gun - a retired officer.
> 
> Another complete failure for the Gun Nut Lobby.



No, fascist, one case doesn't disprove a general truth.

More guns = less crime, no matter how many times you  libtards deny it, and the rest of the country is waking up to that fact as well.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 12, 2014)

Politico said:


> Defiant1 said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Lol, yes they would, dude.

The Constitution itself says that these rights are not granted but enumerated.

Shit, go read a damned book on the topic or something.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 12, 2014)

Ohio National Guard Training Envisions Right-Wing Terrorism



> The ONG 52nd Civil Support Team training scenario involved a plot from local school district employees to use biological weapons in order to advance their beliefs about protecting Gun Rights and Second Amendment rights.
> 
> Portsmouth Chief of Police Bill Raisin told NBC 3 WSAZ-TV in Huntington, West Virginia that *the drill accurately represented the reality of the world we live in, adding that such training helps us all be prepared.*
> 
> Internal ONG documents provided to Media Trackers after repeated delays provide further context to what WSAZ-TV reported last winter.



Friends, the proverbial fodder is about to hit the fan...guessing within the next two years or so, but that is only if things continue to move in that direction. Things could still change DEPENDING ON WHAT WE DO ABOUT IT.


----------



## 9thIDdoc (Feb 12, 2014)

Actually...I'm thinking weeks or months. And it will be *very* nasty.


----------



## Politico (Feb 13, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> > Defiant1 said:
> ...



Lol alrighty then. I am sure the people in Australia agree with you.


----------



## History (Feb 13, 2014)

Well you guys can disagree with the 2nd Amendment if you want to, but this law: 
Keeps the government in check
Helps against the Muslim Jihad movement we are seeing
It is the reason that other countries don't invade us
It is a right to protection of the individual citizen

Tell me Liberals, since illegal immigration, heroin, cocaine, and murder are all illegal, then why do we still have murders, illegal immigration, and access to these drugs??
Exactly the point, it would be the same with Gun Control, therefore the law abiding citizens would be screwed over. Criminals would be the only ones with possession of illegal guns that aren't registered.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 13, 2014)

Politico said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Politico said:
> ...



That a bunch of people do not realize that they have God given rights has ZERO impact or relevance to those who DO realize these rights are from God and inalienable.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 13, 2014)

History said:


> Well you guys can disagree with the 2nd Amendment if you want to, but this law:
> Keeps the government in check
> Helps against the Muslim Jihad movement we are seeing
> It is the reason that other countries don't invade us
> ...



I suspect that most current gun owning, law abiding citizens would cease to be law abiding.

Doesn't matter anyway; we are all criminals these days anyway, in violation of the law three times daily on average.  Why not violate the law and gain something from it if your going to be a criminal anyway?


----------



## Politico (Feb 14, 2014)

Speak for yourself. Just because you break the law every day doesn't mean everyone else does.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 14, 2014)

Politico said:


> Speak for yourself. Just because you break the law every day doesn't mean everyone else does.



Who said that everyone is breaking the law because I do?

You really need a course in reading comprehension, dude.

Experts in their field have pointed this out, that EVERYONE on average is breaking around 3 laws every day that are stupid laws, unheard of and have no impact on reducing criminal behavior.

They are there to ensnare everyone so when the oligarchs want to snag your ass and put you in jail, they have something to charge you with.

That might be OK with jack-boot licking peasants like you, but it is not with most of us here in the USA.


&#8220;Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted &#8211; and you create a nation of law-breakers &#8211; and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.&#8221; 

&#8213; Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged


----------



## Geaux4it (Feb 14, 2014)

The only downside of carrying a firearm is for the thug who may wind up on the business end of my Kimber

-Geaux


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 14, 2014)

Politico said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Politico said:
> ...



We are talking about the United States, where our nation was founded to acknowledge and protect our rights, not a nation that considered it's people subjects until 1987 and still doesn't acknowledge the full scope of Human Rights.


----------



## Synthaholic (Feb 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > So much for the argument that *"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"*.
> ...



If a retired police officer isn't the good guy, who is?

Who are they referring to, then, when they say "good guy"?


----------



## Synthaholic (Feb 14, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > So much for the argument that *"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"*.
> ...




^^^ fucking idiot who doesn't have the first clue what 'fascist' means.


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 14, 2014)

9thIDdoc said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > So much for the argument that *"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"*.
> ...



The problem is that labels are being assigned without all the facts.  We don't know if the guy was a good guy being attacked or a bad guy who committed a crime.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 14, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



I know exactly what it means, you stupid fascist boob.

Lol, and even if I didn't, a quick google would yield text for me to copy and paste, nitwit.

But in short, the corporate crony, crypto police state we now have combined with the executive order rule by decree POTUS and cowardly Congress and universal spying of legal US citizens who are subject to an assassinating government that we have now is FASCIST something you are totally OK with.

Fascist.


----------



## Mr. H. (Feb 14, 2014)

In a few month's time, I will be legally carrying a firearm. As a resident of Illinois I represent the last holdout in our entire 57 state nation. 

I will be constantly faced with downsides. For that I have been trained. 16 fucking hours of it. 

And I pray that a single upside will never present itself. 

But if it should...


----------



## The Professor (Feb 14, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



It makes sense, except for the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court says it doesn't.


----------



## Geaux4it (Feb 15, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...





> The NRA has the US by the balls and is squeezing much too hard.



No, the NRA has tyranny, aka. Obama by the balls

-Geaux


----------



## Politico (Feb 15, 2014)

Mr. H. said:


> In a few month's time, I will be legally carrying a firearm. As a resident of Illinois I represent the last holdout in our entire 57 state nation.
> 
> I will be constantly faced with downsides. For that I have been trained. 16 fucking hours of it.
> 
> ...



I hope as well. I can personally tell you it is no fun when it happens.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 15, 2014)

The Professor said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



And the fact that it is either a stupid misunderstanding of American history or an *ideologically based LIE*.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 15, 2014)

Geaux4it said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...



By the balls, huh?

Is that why the Obama regime can simply write any new laws they want?

Face it, the NRA is about to get flanked politically as it's strategy was always based on controlling Congress, and now that Congress is mentally emasculated and unable to oppose Obama using its primary weapon; defunding measures they do not like.

The NRA has long ignored anything outside its narrow range of concerns, and now is going to get spanked by Executive Orders after the 2014 elections.

The 2015 to 2016 calendar is going to have lots of very bad things on it unless  the Tea Party can gain control of the House.


----------



## skookerasbil (Feb 15, 2014)

Gun grabbing is gay.

Next, they'll be trying to ban assault snowballs!!!

http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2014/02/14/800-pound-runaway-snowball-slams-into-college-dorm-knocks-in-wall/


----------



## skookerasbil (Feb 15, 2014)

Recently, posted this up on a firearms website in response to: TOP 10 REASONS YOU OWN A FIREARM

*
In no particular order........

 10) for home defense, beats the hell out of lefty neighbors wiffle ball bat collection
 9) If somebody comes into my home, I like the idea of removing a whole head with one shot
8) better sleep
 7) when the SHTF...dominates the lefties NURF weapons
 6) love that sound when a round is chambered
 5) Im part of a fraternity that scares the piss out of the gubmint
 4) I meet cool people who think like I do
 3) I love American tradition
 2) see  # 10
 1) Rifle in my hand makes me feel like Thor *


----------



## Politico (Feb 16, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> > Bumberclyde said:
> ...



Hilarious. You just said in this thread that we would not have to worry about our guns even if there were no 2nd amendment. 

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8609937-post1126.html

Now you're warning how Obammy is going to executive order the NRA out of existence. Make up your mind which is it?


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 16, 2014)

Politico said:


> JimBowie1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Geaux4it said:
> ...



Dude, stop being so fucking stupid.

I said, "The Constitution itself says that these rights are not granted but enumerated."

That does not mean that Obama cant go after our guns, dumbass, but only that he cannot do it _legitimately _and *according to the Constitution*.

You seem to assume that anything Obama does is by definition  legal and legit. No, they guy is turning himself into a dictator.

roflmao


----------



## Politico (Feb 17, 2014)

eah RMFAOL is right.


----------



## JimBowie1958 (Feb 17, 2014)

Politico said:


> eah RMFAOL is right.



lol, you really are a simple fool, aren't you?


----------



## Synthaholic (Feb 20, 2014)

JimBowie1958 said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > JimBowie1958 said:
> ...



Now have?  

It only began under Obama?

Like I said, you're a fucking idiot.


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> The 2nd amendment was about protecting Americans from redcoats and indians. Since neither is now a threat, the 2nd amendment is now obsolete.



Good God, are you really so stupid?  The "red coats" had not been a problem for 8 years before the Second Amendment was written.


----------



## longly (Feb 21, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Redfish said:
> ...



Sorry you go it wrong the other guy got it right.  The Second  amendment refers to all threats not just warring Indians tribes and the government. It is too bad the people of the Ukraine don&#8217;t have a second amendment; perhaps then they would not have to worry so much about the police murdering the government&#8217;s political opponents.


----------



## birddog (Feb 22, 2014)

I look forward to attending the NRA National Convention in Indianapolis on April 25th.

It's a great benefit to have the NRA!


----------



## Synthaholic (Feb 22, 2014)

birddog said:


> I look forward to attending the NRA National Convention in Indianapolis on April 25th.
> 
> It's a great benefit to have the NRA!


I wonder how many accidental shootings will occur.


----------



## Spoonman (Feb 22, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> birddog said:
> 
> 
> > I look forward to attending the NRA National Convention in Indianapolis on April 25th.
> ...


none, as usual


----------



## Spoonman (Feb 22, 2014)

Mr. H. said:


> In a few month's time, I will be legally carrying a firearm. As a resident of Illinois I represent the last holdout in our entire 57 state nation.
> 
> I will be constantly faced with downsides. For that I have been trained. 16 fucking hours of it.
> 
> ...



thanks to an asshole like Andrew Cuomo, I am now carrying stuff that has been legal all my life but is all of a sudden illegal.  no good has ever come from a Cuomo in NY


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 25, 2014)

Spoonman said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > birddog said:
> ...



Since very few ignorant liberals attend, there shouldn't be any.


----------



## Bumberclyde (Feb 25, 2014)

birddog said:


> I look forward to attending the NRA National Convention in Indianapolis on April 25th.
> 
> It's a great benefit to have the NRA!



Should be the biggest gathering of small dicks ever!


----------



## Politico (Feb 26, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> birddog said:
> 
> 
> > I look forward to attending the NRA National Convention in Indianapolis on April 25th.
> ...



None as long as you don't go.


----------



## hunarcy (Feb 26, 2014)

Bumberclyde said:


> birddog said:
> 
> 
> > I look forward to attending the NRA National Convention in Indianapolis on April 25th.
> ...



So, you'll be there!


----------

