Alleged Intruder Attacks Elderly Woman With a Club, Her Husband Responds With a Gun

[OriginalShroom]

Good for him? Was his gun legal?

Pretty sure being attacked with a bat wasn't legal so why the f*ck would you focus on the gun?

Because the OP is lying about "people wanting to ban guns left and right".

Really?

Do you expect us to forget that Diane Feinstein spent two years working on a bill that would ban hundreds of guns by name and thousand more by design and that she was just waiting for the "right moment", when people were emotionally ready because of a mass killing, to submit it?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Pretty sure being attacked with a bat wasn't legal so why the f*ck would you focus on the gun?

Because the OP is lying about "people wanting to ban guns left and right".

Really?

Do you expect us to forget that Diane Feinstein spent two years working on a bill that would ban hundreds of guns by name and thousand more by design and that she was just waiting for the "right moment", when people were emotionally ready because of a mass killing, to submit it?

Yeah, I tried explaining that to him, with no avail. Absolutely brilliant though.

 

[Politico]

Good for him? Was his gun legal?

Pretty sure being attacked with a bat wasn't legal so why the f*ck would you focus on the gun?

Because he is a poser that doesn't really care if people die. He is only interested in politicization. Ignore him.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Because the OP is lying about "people wanting to ban guns left and right".

Really?

Do you expect us to forget that Diane Feinstein spent two years working on a bill that would ban hundreds of guns by name and thousand more by design and that she was just waiting for the "right moment", when people were emotionally ready because of a mass killing, to submit it?

Yeah, I tried explaining that to him, with no avail. Absolutely brilliant though.

Sorry for continuing to derail your thread... I just get so pissed off at people who are intentionally ignorant of the facts on any issue so widely discussed as Gun Control is.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Really?

Do you expect us to forget that Diane Feinstein spent two years working on a bill that would ban hundreds of guns by name and thousand more by design and that she was just waiting for the "right moment", when people were emotionally ready because of a mass killing, to submit it?

Yeah, I tried explaining that to him, with no avail. Absolutely brilliant though.

Sorry for continuing to derail your thread... I just get so pissed off at people who are intentionally ignorant of the facts on any issue so widely discussed as Gun Control is.

No worries shroom, I though it was pretty good retort, actually. But yeah, let us get this train back on the rails folks!

 

[TemplarKormac]

Simple question, what would have happened had they been unarmed? Do you Liberals seriously doubt that guns help protect well being in the right hands?

 

[OriginalShroom]

"Legal" or not, I don't care.

I am glad that they had the gun to protect themselves with.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Good for him? Was his gun legal?

Pretty sure being attacked with a bat wasn't legal so why the f*ck would you focus on the gun?

Because he is a poser that doesn't really care if people die. He is only interested in politicization. Ignore him.

As for Lakhota, throw rules and facts at him, he will go scurrying back to his little badger hole.

 

[Ravi]

Right, so Dianne Fienstein doesn't count huh?

Dianne Feinstein? Hell, we can't even get universal background checks passed - so how can anyone in Congress ban guns?

All Obama has to do is sign an executive order, just like he does with a lot of other stuff.

And while you're here. Any more irrelevant posts will be reported to the moderators. You have purposefully hijacked this thread and is a violation of "Zone 2" rules:

"Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking threads.

Am I clear?

He asked you a pertinent question and you took offense and started trolling your own thread. Now you are threatening to rat him out to the mods.

Unbelievable. I bet you're a "conservative"

 

[Franticfrank]

I'm glad the couple are ok but somebody is dead after this. Did they call the police after the suspect came to the shop the first time? Maybe such old people should have a panic alarm or something. Still, I can understand the guy shooting the intruder if his life was in danger.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Would universal background checks have prevented this law abiding couple from being armed?

No.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Would universal background checks have prevented this law abiding couple from being armed?

No.

Are you sure?

Considering the number of false positives on the No-Fly list.... Remember, even Ted Kennedy has his name on it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Would universal background checks have prevented this law abiding couple from being armed?

No.

Are you sure?

Considering the number of false positives on the No-Fly list.... Remember, even Ted Kennedy has his name on it.

I am sure beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof in our system.

If we eliminate all background checks, including identification, proof of age, then will you be satisfied?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Maaan, what if the Muslims decide to form a well regulated militia?

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart _ Weak Constitution - Video Dailymotion

 

[TemplarKormac]

Would universal background checks have prevented this law abiding couple from being armed?

No.

Are you sure?

Considering the number of false positives on the No-Fly list.... Remember, even Ted Kennedy has his name on it.

I am sure beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof in our system.

If we eliminate all background checks, including identification, proof of age, then will you be satisfied?

No. Just the crap--the PORK--that goes along with it. Background checks are fine, but registry? Are you out of your pea pickin mind?

 

[Defiant1]

I'm glad the couple are ok but somebody is dead after this. Did they call the police after the suspect came to the shop the first time? Maybe such old people should have a panic alarm or something. Still, I can understand the guy shooting the intruder if his life was in danger.

If an unwanted person is on my property I'm not going to wait until our lives are in danger.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Dianne Feinstein? Hell, we can't even get universal background checks passed - so how can anyone in Congress ban guns?

All Obama has to do is sign an executive order, just like he does with a lot of other stuff.

And while you're here. Any more irrelevant posts will be reported to the moderators. You have purposefully hijacked this thread and is a violation of "Zone 2" rules:

"Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking threads.

Am I clear?

He asked you a pertinent question and you took offense and started trolling your own thread. Now you are threatening to rat him out to the mods.

Unbelievable. I bet you're a "conservative"

Actually, I am a right leaning independent if you must know.. And I answered his question, with an answer and a warning. Notice his lack of a response.

I shall not explain myself further.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Would universal background checks have prevented this law abiding couple from being armed?

No.

Are you sure?

Considering the number of false positives on the No-Fly list.... Remember, even Ted Kennedy has his name on it.

I am sure beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof in our system.

If we eliminate all background checks, including identification, proof of age, then will you be satisfied?

Being as the Standard is innocent until proven guilty, I would agree with that. Let the criminal get caught with the weapon then punish them. Don't make me prove I'm not a criminal before I can get a new weapon.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Are you sure?

Considering the number of false positives on the No-Fly list.... Remember, even Ted Kennedy has his name on it.

I am sure beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof in our system.

If we eliminate all background checks, including identification, proof of age, then will you be satisfied?

Being as the Standard is innocent until proven guilty, I would agree with that. Let the criminal get caught with the weapon then punish them. Don't make me prove I'm not a criminal before I can get a new weapon.

That's not the standard. I can't get money out of a bank before I prove I have money in the bank,

can I? Are my rights being violated if the bank requires proof?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Are you sure?

Considering the number of false positives on the No-Fly list.... Remember, even Ted Kennedy has his name on it.

I am sure beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof in our system.

If we eliminate all background checks, including identification, proof of age, then will you be satisfied?

No. Just the crap--the PORK--that goes along with it. Background checks are fine, but registry? Are you out of your pea pickin mind?

New gun sales are already all registered. You don't think if you go buy a shotgun at the Walmart that there isn't a record of purchase kept,

and in the event that shotgun was used in a crime they would be able to trace its source?

Your paranoia is misplaced.