A citizen with a gun took out the Texas killer as he fled.

upload_2017-11-5_22-9-51.jpeg
 
Honey, you take away guns, the criminal still has them, not the law abiding citizen.
He was dishonorably discharged from the Air Force 3 years ago. He couldn’t legally own a weapon.
Possibly but do we even know how he got his gun yet? I assume it was legal as it was on his Facebook page before they took down his profile.
I don’t know. If he really wanted one, he could get one easily anyways since we’ve been so completely lax on gun laws for so many decades.
What does does the legal gun owner have in common with the illegal gun owner?

They both have availability.

Honey, you take away guns, no one has them.
That's how it works in other countries. The RW argues if we have strict gun laws, only the criminals will have guns. But in countries with strict gun laws, there are very few guns in circulation in general. Criminals don't have a lot of guns like the RW tries to portray it.
 
Since when did the 2nd amendment stop mass shootings? It does seems to enable them more often. Cute Boyos.
 
Honey, you take away guns, the criminal still has them, not the law abiding citizen.
He was dishonorably discharged from the Air Force 3 years ago. He couldn’t legally own a weapon.
What does does the legal gun owner have in common with the illegal gun owner?

They both have availability.

As to your observations, absolutely right.

"Oh man, I can't kill all those people because it is ILLEGAL for me to have a gun. Damn. Forget it." :rolleyes: Makes you wonder what kind of a silly person would think such a thing would ever happen. These people are not living in reality but an ideological fairy tale.
Same goes for murder laws. "Oh man, I can't kill all those people because it is ILLEGAL for me to murder them. Damn. Forget it." :rolleyes: Makes you wonder what kind of a silly person would think such a thing would ever happen. These people are not living in reality but an ideological fairy tale.

Laws certainly aren't useless. They work well with most people, but there is a certain segment of the population that is known as CRIMINALS who ignore laws. Someone who is willing to go into a church and murder people is NOT concerned with any laws.

Sure. Also a great reason they should never have access to a gun. Ever.
 
And yes this is political as the demands for gun control if implemented could have allowed this killer to get away.
Or made the hoops for getting a gun enough to discourage the killer from getting one, and 26 people would still be alive today.
Tell us what hoops would have prevented Vegas, asshole.
Alert: guy has massive arsenal of guns. Potential nutjob. Monitor closely.
So all of the cops and Marines I know who all own 20+ firearms are crazy murderers who should be denied their Constitutional Rights?

You fuckhead lefties have lost it.
 
Sure he was. Up until he murdered a bunch of people, proving murder laws only work with law abiding people.

He was law abiding?

yup


up til he got the Dishonorable Discharge.

(Which made it illegal for him to buy a firearm legally)
Boom. Proof that laws don't work. Thank you :clap:


Laws dont' work...

amazingly, they never have,


tell us, O Brilliant One?


How many MORE laws on firearms would we have to enact, before this stops?

another 1,000?

5,000?

10,000?

Do we have the military do house to house, to register firearms?

what is your solution?

Make laws that it's illegal to sell to criminals?
already on the books

(criminals dont' care)
They work in other countries, gun laws. The US has by far the highest number of gun deaths than any other developed nation. If America isn't great, this is one reason.

'Other' countries don't have a 2nd Amendment that allows citizens the right to bear arms.

'Other' countries don't have 400+ million firearms in the hands of their citizens that would have to be confiscated or turned in to make your dream come true

Nobody talks about the millions of legal gun owners that have owned guns for years and never shot anyone or used in any type of crime.

They only want to change the laws because of the hundreds(?) of people that do :rolleyes:
 
Curious that a Muslim who dude runs down 8 and brandished a paintball and BB gun requires a complete border closure and the reaction to this guy is, Meh, more guns.

Truly insane we have become.
 
13 Mass Killings Where No Guns Were Involved

That was all Julio Gonzalez (pictured above) needed to set the Happy Land social club in Brooklyn on fire in March of 1990. After starting the fire near the entrance, he pulled down the metal gate and left 87 people inside to burn or suffocate to death within minutes.

The reason? Gonzalez had gotten into a heated argument earlier that evening with his girlfriend, who was checking coats inside the club.

The Sandy Hook massacre was not the largest mass murder at an American school. That occurred way back on May 18, 1927, at the Bath Consolidated School in Michigan.

The school's caretaker was apparently angry about property taxes; so he placed dynamite at numerous spots around the school over a period of months and then set a timer for the explosion to occur during classes. A total of 45 people died that day in Bath Township.

Timothy McVeigh used fuel oil and fertilizer to build the Ryder truck bomb that exploded in front of a federal building in Oklahoma City in April of 1995.

A total of 168 people perished in what was then the deadliest terror attack on American soil.
You are citing rarieties as opposed to commonalities. In the US we have a mass shooting almost every other day. Very different than when someone intentionally sets a fire that kills a lot of people happening once in ten years.

It goes to show that people who are intent on killing others are going to do so using whatever means. No laws are going to stop someone who is intent upon murdering people. Hello?

Also, just because there are SOME loons who abuse their rights, in no way means that the rest of us have to lose our rights for it. Just like your arguments about Muslims. Just because there are a bunch of loons amon
Just because some Muslims are loons why take away rights for all Muslims?
 
8E7844EB-F088-4B6F-9C15-A322C382F98B.jpeg


Only 8.3% of guns are acquired legally and used in a crime.
And yes this is political as the demands for gun control if implemented could have allowed this killer to get away.
Or made the hoops for getting a gun enough to discourage the killer from getting one, and 26 people would still be alive today.
Possibly but do we even know how he got his gun yet? I assume it was legal as it was on his Facebook page before they took down his profile.
I don’t know. If he really wanted one, he could get one easily anyways since we’ve been so completely lax on gun laws for so many decades.


We aren't lax on gun laws...we have about 20,000 of them...we are lax in locking up repeat, violent gun offenders.....
Ding dong. This guy was not a repeat offender.:rolleyes:
 
Yes, he was, as he had illegally acquired the guns, before illegally murdering anyone. He was also dishonorably discharged, so he was guilty of something for that to happen, as well.
And yes this is political as the demands for gun control if implemented could have allowed this killer to get away.
Or made the hoops for getting a gun enough to discourage the killer from getting one, and 26 people would still be alive today.
Possibly but do we even know how he got his gun yet? I assume it was legal as it was on his Facebook page before they took down his profile.
I don’t know. If he really wanted one, he could get one easily anyways since we’ve been so completely lax on gun laws for so many decades.


We aren't lax on gun laws...we have about 20,000 of them...we are lax in locking up repeat, violent gun offenders.....
Ding dong. This guy was not a repeat offender.:rolleyes:
 
While we all argue I am listening to Fox News as they name some of the dead & their ages.

Very depressing.
 
May have very well saved dozens of more lives had he had plans to go on a further shooting spree.
Your point is so ridiculous, so fucked up. If they guy had not had automatic guns to go in and kill all those people, no one would need a gun to shoot him. You're saying isn't it great we have dentists to fill cavaties when if people took care of their teeth, they wouldn't have cavaties. If we didn't let private citizens have automatic weapons, they couldn't go into a place and kill 26 people in seconds in the first place. You gun nuts are absurd.
How do you "not let" citizens have automatic weapons? Make them illegal? Then, only criminals will have automatic weapons.
Don't quite have all your groceries bagged - doya?
Poor logic and poor knowledge of the facts. In countries with very strict gun laws, guns go out of circulation in general and it is not a fact that only criminals have guns. Criminals can't get a hold of them either.

And another point: someone whose screen name is kill a liberal has absolutely no credibility whatsoever.
 
Show me any nation that has forbidden guns that has a zero murder rate.
How many MORE laws on firearms would we have to enact, before this stops?

another 1,000?

5,000?

10,000?

We'll never know, since you gun nuts already won. We'll never be one of those nations with a murder rate of 1.0 or less because of that. I've already noted in this thread that the number of guns in this country, and the ease at which criminals can get their hands on them because of that, is the best argument against gun control.
It may not be zero, but it is a hell of a lot lower than in the US.
 
Tell us where, Esmeralda.
May have very well saved dozens of more lives had he had plans to go on a further shooting spree.
Your point is so ridiculous, so fucked up. If they guy had not had automatic guns to go in and kill all those people, no one would need a gun to shoot him. You're saying isn't it great we have dentists to fill cavaties when if people took care of their teeth, they wouldn't have cavaties. If we didn't let private citizens have automatic weapons, they couldn't go into a place and kill 26 people in seconds in the first place. You gun nuts are absurd.
How do you "not let" citizens have automatic weapons? Make them illegal? Then, only criminals will have automatic weapons.
Don't quite have all your groceries bagged - doya?
Poor logic and poor knowledge of the facts. In countries with very strict gun laws, guns go out of circulation in general and it is not a fact that only criminals have guns. Criminals can't get a hold of them either.

And another point: someone whose screen name is kill a liberal has absolutely no credibility whatsoever.
 
13 Mass Killings Where No Guns Were Involved

That was all Julio Gonzalez (pictured above) needed to set the Happy Land social club in Brooklyn on fire in March of 1990. After starting the fire near the entrance, he pulled down the metal gate and left 87 people inside to burn or suffocate to death within minutes.

The reason? Gonzalez had gotten into a heated argument earlier that evening with his girlfriend, who was checking coats inside the club.

The Sandy Hook massacre was not the largest mass murder at an American school. That occurred way back on May 18, 1927, at the Bath Consolidated School in Michigan.

The school's caretaker was apparently angry about property taxes; so he placed dynamite at numerous spots around the school over a period of months and then set a timer for the explosion to occur during classes. A total of 45 people died that day in Bath Township.

Timothy McVeigh used fuel oil and fertilizer to build the Ryder truck bomb that exploded in front of a federal building in Oklahoma City in April of 1995.

A total of 168 people perished in what was then the deadliest terror attack on American soil.
You are citing rarieties as opposed to commonalities. In the US we have a mass shooting almost every other day. Very different than when someone intentionally sets a fire that kills a lot of people happening once in ten years.

It goes to show that people who are intent on killing others are going to do so using whatever means. No laws are going to stop someone who is intent upon murdering people. Hello?

Also, just because there are SOME loons who abuse their rights, in no way means that the rest of us have to lose our rights for it. Just like your arguments about Muslims. Just because there are a bunch of loons amon
Just because some Muslims are loons why take away rights for all Muslims?
All Muslims want a world wide caliphate. The ones who choose not to do it via violence does it via uncontrolled births.
 
May have very well saved dozens of more lives had he had plans to go on a further shooting spree.
Your point is so ridiculous, so fucked up. If they guy had not had automatic guns to go in and kill all those people, no one would need a gun to shoot him. You're saying isn't it great we have dentists to fill cavaties when if people took care of their teeth, they wouldn't have cavaties. If we didn't let private citizens have automatic weapons, they couldn't go into a place and kill 26 people in seconds in the first place. You gun nuts are absurd.
How do you "not let" citizens have automatic weapons? Make them illegal? Then, only criminals will have automatic weapons.
Don't quite have all your groceries bagged - doya?
Poor logic and poor knowledge of the facts. In countries with very strict gun laws, guns go out of circulation in general and it is not a fact that only criminals have guns. Criminals can't get a hold of them either.

And another point: someone whose screen name is kill a liberal has absolutely no credibility whatsoever.
Criminals can't get a hold of them either.

giphy.gif
 

Forum List

Back
Top