60 Year Old Woman Shoots 2 of 7 ‘Knock Out’ Attackers

[M14 Shooter]

I advocate restrictions on assault weapons....

Really.

1: Define the additional restrictions you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.
I do look forward to your response.

You will not get it. I have discussed that shit in previous threads. Check the archives. I am a gun owner and do not want to ban guns. That is the matter at hand in this discussion. Enjoy your day.

I see.
You want to restrict 'assault weapons', but you cannot define those restrictions or produce a sound argument in support of them.
Welcome to irrelevance.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Both of us own guns, dickhead.

Got any more libs who want to ban guns AND think shooting thugs who assault innocent people is OK? Any? You dumb fuck.

HA!

No more soup for you, LL!

You are taking a hell of a beating here [MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION]. (just stop....I am not for gun banning, I am for responsible gun ownership...get it yet?)

Actually, you should stop beating yourself. You're a gun owner, but want to determine who is responsible enough to own one? Hello? McFly? (knocks on Zona's head) Is anybody home?! Hellooo?!

 

[Sunshine]

If this were happening in my city, I would simply not go to those neighborhoods. I would not live in a crime ridden neighborhoood, even if I had to live in a tiny, one room apartment. Many times people make choices that lead to their being placed in harm's way or in dangerous situations. I'm not blaming the victim, but in a way it's no different than choosing to go bunging jumping, mountain climbing, or sky diving: if you make the choice to do something dangerous, you have to expect there may be consequences. If this woman has been mugged a couple of times already, why doesn't she move instead of getting a gun? What is the joy in killing someone? And, she was only lucky, really; she could have just as easily been killed herself. Staying away from a potentially dangerous situation is far safer than going into one armed. I have been in a situation where my life was threatened directly by someone with a gun, so I am not just talking through my hat.

So if you ever get mugged you are going to move?

It's the teenagers that made the situation dangerous, not the sixty year old lady.
I doubt that she had any joy from killing the two she shot.

I have traveled to 40 different countries by myself and never been assaulted in any way. I've lived in four different countries as well as the US and never been mugged. I was threatened with a knife once when I was 19 and learned how to avoid that by not placing myself in a precarious situation. Yes, if my neighborhood was crime ridden, I would move, why not? It is only sensible. In my 30's I used to do a lot of long distance running, on my own. I got a big dog to run with me and no one ever bothered me. Having a big dog also prevented anyone from trying to burglarize my home. In the States, I lived alone, a single woman, for many years, and never felt fearful as I had a big dog in the house with me. I also lived in a decent, non-crime ridden neighborhood. I was not rich, by any means, but I managed to find decent housing in a decent neighborhood. You can use common sense solutions without arming yourself. I have no desire at any level to kill someone; I don't believe in the death penalty and certainly not for anything other than murder. The joy you gun nuts take in potentially blowing away someone who might break into your house is very, very disturbing.

Maybe the woman had no choice but to live where she did. A lot of elderly people live in the projects. Because it is the only place they can afford to live. You are one judgmental stupid cow.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Really.

1: Define the additional restrictions you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.
I do look forward to your response.

You will not get it. I have discussed that shit in previous threads. Check the archives. I am a gun owner and do not want to ban guns. That is the matter at hand in this discussion. Enjoy your day.

I see.
You want to restrict 'assault weapons', but you cannot define those restrictions or produce a sound argument in support of them.
Welcome to irrelevance.

Do you think I want to ban guns?

 

[Zona]

Come again?

This is your example of a liberal saying ban guns? Wow. Keep digging liar. Keep digging.

By the way, I AM A GUN OWNER...WHY WOULD I SAY BAN GUNS? Yes, I feel as though people who are not responsible should not own them. Yes I feel as though Cleetus should not be able to own nuclear weapons just like Leroy should not be able to own a tank.

I feel as though responsible people should be able to protect themselves and their families and homes.

You contradict yourself. Define "responsible" in your quaint liberal terms for me. Your comparison of nuclear weapons to small arms is pretty funny.

Nope, you said I was for banning guns. The burdon of proof is on you. Good luck skippy.

 

[Sunshine]

60 Year Old Woman Shoots 2 of 7 ‘Knock Out’ Attackers

Beulah Montgomery had just turned 60 the day before...
There we go!

I call bullshit on this story. It's not been reported by ANY real news source. Not even LOCAL TV, that usually jumps all over it. I'm guessing "Beulah Montgomery" is supposed to sound black, making it even more vindicating for gun proponents.

I'll apologize if I'm wrong. But I don't think I am.

About 58,800 results (0.31 seconds)
Search Results
News for Beulah Montgomery knockout

58,000 hits on it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And? Did I suggest banning guns? No. Got any more?

Idiot, you were advocating an assault weapons ban. Pretty plain to see. They say confession is good for the soul. Man up, LoneLaugher.

I advocate restrictions on assault weapons. Not on guns in general. You are really failing here. I......own......firearms. I am not in favor of banning guns. I am in favor of regulating them. You are wrong.

LOL, ban one, ban them all. Don't try to sleaze your way out of this one. Restricting? Regulating? Banning? What's the difference?

 

[M14 Shooter]

You will not get it. I have discussed that shit in previous threads. Check the archives. I am a gun owner and do not want to ban guns. That is the matter at hand in this discussion. Enjoy your day.

I see.
You want to restrict 'assault weapons', but you cannot define those restrictions or produce a sound argument in support of them.
Welcome to irrelevance.

Do you think I want to ban guns?

Hard to say, given that you will not describe what 'additional restrictions' you want to place on 'assault weapons'.

So, again:

1: Define the additional restrictions you seek
2: Show the necessity for these measures
3: Show that these measures will meet the need you described
4: Show that these measures do not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding
5: Do all of this without arguing from emotion, ignorance, dishonesty or any other logical fallacies.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is your example of a liberal saying ban guns? Wow. Keep digging liar. Keep digging.

By the way, I AM A GUN OWNER...WHY WOULD I SAY BAN GUNS? Yes, I feel as though people who are not responsible should not own them. Yes I feel as though Cleetus should not be able to own nuclear weapons just like Leroy should not be able to own a tank.

I feel as though responsible people should be able to protect themselves and their families and homes.

You contradict yourself. Define "responsible" in your quaint liberal terms for me. Your comparison of nuclear weapons to small arms is pretty funny.

Nope, you said I was for banning guns. The burdon of proof is on you. Good luck skippy.

I just did. You'll probably say just like LL here that you want them 'regulated' or 'restricted.' Sorry, I met my burden of proof, the onus lies on you, Zona.

 

[Zona]

You contradict yourself. Define "responsible" in your quaint liberal terms for me. Your comparison of nuclear weapons to small arms is pretty funny.

Nope, you said I was for banning guns. The burdon of proof is on you. Good luck skippy.

I just did. You'll probably say just like LL here that you want them 'regulated' or 'restricted.' Sorry, I met my burden of proof, the onus lies on you, Zona.

Its like being a cat and playing with a crippled mouse when I deal with you. It really is. How many times will you get spanked in here?

 

[LoneLaugher]

You met your burden of proof? According to whom? You?

How's the job hunt coming along, slacker boy?

 

[Asclepias]

This is your example of a liberal saying ban guns? Wow. Keep digging liar. Keep digging.

By the way, I AM A GUN OWNER...WHY WOULD I SAY BAN GUNS? Yes, I feel as though people who are not responsible should not own them. Yes I feel as though Cleetus should not be able to own nuclear weapons just like Leroy should not be able to own a tank.

I feel as though responsible people should be able to protect themselves and their families and homes.

You contradict yourself. Define "responsible" in your quaint liberal terms for me. Your comparison of nuclear weapons to small arms is pretty funny.

Nope, you said I was for banning guns. The burdon of proof is on you. Good luck skippy.

Stop kicking his ass like that. Its unfair.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Nope, you said I was for banning guns. The burdon of proof is on you. Good luck skippy.

I just did. You'll probably say just like LL here that you want them 'regulated' or 'restricted.' Sorry, I met my burden of proof, the onus lies on you, Zona.

Its like being a cat and playing with a crippled mouse when I deal with you. It really is. How many times will you get spanked in here?

Considering that all you do is troll and whine incessantly, make politics out of tragic issues and otherwise never debate with facts on any given argument, I fail to see how you're slapping anyone around. I've been here 8 months and am already a veteran here. You? You are a peon. A court jester. You're posts are good for nothing other than your own entertainment.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You contradict yourself. Define "responsible" in your quaint liberal terms for me. Your comparison of nuclear weapons to small arms is pretty funny.

Nope, you said I was for banning guns. The burdon of proof is on you. Good luck skippy.

Stop kicking his ass like that. Its unfair.

LOL. Kicking my ass? You wanna go, Asclepias?

If I recall, you want to seek out and expose racism wherever you meet it. Oh yes, I remember you.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I just did. You'll probably say just like LL here that you want them 'regulated' or 'restricted.' Sorry, I met my burden of proof, the onus lies on you, Zona.

Its like being a cat and playing with a crippled mouse when I deal with you. It really is. How many times will you get spanked in here?

Considering that all you do is troll and whine incessantly, make politics out of tragic issues and otherwise never debate with facts on any given argument, I fail to see how you're slapping anyone around. I've been here 8 months and am already a veteran here. You? You are a peon. A court jester. You're posts are good for nothing other than your own entertainment.

You are a veteran here? What does that mean exactly? You got some kind of certificate for that?

A veteran!

LO Fucking L, what a tool.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No. I have never expressed a willingness to ban guns. You fail again, loser.

Come again?

It is nuts to WANT to own assault weapons. It is nuts to get off on going to the range and shooting assault weapons. It is nuts to think that introducing more assault weapons into the mix will result in fewer incidents of gun violence.

And? Did I suggest banning guns? No. Got any more?

You clearly said owning "assault" weapons was crazy. I would assume from that tirade you would ban them. By the way , care to define an Assault weapon for us?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Come again?

And? Did I suggest banning guns? No. Got any more?

You clearly said owning "assault" weapons was crazy. I would assume from that tirade you would ban them. By the way , care to define an Assault weapon for us?

I love you guys. You are so stupid. You just cannot accept the liberal point of view on guns. I am very much mainstream lib in this regard.

I own guns. I do not want to ban guns. I wish to regulate them. I wish to restrict the proliferation of assault weapons ( WE ALL KNOW WHT THAT TERM MEANS ) and try to keep them outnofbthe hands of CRAZY PEOPLE.

How many times will you challenge someone to define assault weapons? Do you think you will trip someone up on that? It is obvious. Use your brain.

Want to ask again?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Its like being a cat and playing with a crippled mouse when I deal with you. It really is. How many times will you get spanked in here?

Considering that all you do is troll and whine incessantly, make politics out of tragic issues and otherwise never debate with facts on any given argument, I fail to see how you're slapping anyone around. I've been here 8 months and am already a veteran here. You? You are a peon. A court jester. You're posts are good for nothing other than your own entertainment.

You are a veteran here? What does that mean exactly? You got some kind of certificate for that?

A veteran!

LO Fucking L, what a tool.

LOL. You know exactly what that means. Means I garner more respect on these boards than you do. Or ever did. That's not bragging, that's a fact.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And? Did I suggest banning guns? No. Got any more?

You clearly said owning "assault" weapons was crazy. I would assume from that tirade you would ban them. By the way , care to define an Assault weapon for us?

I love you guys. You are so stupid. You just cannot accept the liberal point of view on guns. I am very much mainstream lib in this regard.

I own guns. I do not want to ban guns. I wish to regulate them. I wish to restrict the proliferation of assault weapons ( WE ALL KNOW WHT THAT TERM MEANS ) and try to keep them outnofbthe hands of CRAZY PEOPLE.

How many times will you challenge someone to define assault weapons? Do you think you will trip someone up on that? It is obvious. Use your brain.

Want to ask again?

Since no one not even the Government has ever actually described what an assault weapon is, perhaps you could. You claim it is insane to want to own one, define it. Define what is insane to own.

Let me help you, all the Government did is say that certain aesthetics on a semi automatic rifle made it an assault rifle. Things like a bayonet stud, care to cite for us all the bayoneting in the US? Or a flash suppressor. Care to cite for us all the unlawful flash suppressors.

Be specific define for us what type of semi automatic rifle is an Assault rifle. Explaining how the items you describe make the weapon more deadly more lethal then any other semi automatic rifle.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And? Did I suggest banning guns? No. Got any more?

You clearly said owning "assault" weapons was crazy. I would assume from that tirade you would ban them. By the way , care to define an Assault weapon for us?

I love you guys. You are so stupid. You just cannot accept the liberal point of view on guns. I am very much mainstream lib in this regard.

I own guns. I do not want to ban guns. I wish to regulate them. I wish to restrict the proliferation of assault weapons ( WE ALL KNOW WHT THAT TERM MEANS ) and try to keep them outnofbthe hands of CRAZY PEOPLE.

How many times will you challenge someone to define assault weapons? Do you think you will trip someone up on that? It is obvious. Use your brain.

Want to ask again?

"I wish to regulate them."

Want to try that reply again?