Chris Kyle, Author Of 'American Sniper,' Shot And Killed At Gun Range

[Mad Scientist]

Kind of ironic, having survived all these wars... and being killed by a whacked out Army Buddy.

Marine. Iraq War Vet.

Eddie Ray Routh, Iraq Veteran, Charged With Murdering Chris Kyle

 

[Truthmatters]

I still dont think its a good idea to try and treat a medical condition when you are not a Dr.

taking him to a shooting range was OBVIOUSLY a mistake huh

 

[Sallow]

He killed 125 people and you call him a good man?

How many has Obama killed?

Depends on who you talk too and what time of the day it is..

 

[Sallow]

I still dont think its a good idea to try and treat a medical condition when you are not a Dr.

taking him to a shooting range was OBVIOUSLY a mistake huh

A very big..mistake.

 

[Warrior102]

He killed 125 people and you call him a good man?

Too bad he didn't kill 10,025 of those Al Queda scumbags, asswipe. I know you mourn the loss of your Muslim brothers, but do me a favor - stick a dick in your mouth and STFU.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Armed Citizens Fail NRA Test: So much for protection argument(s)

It's a miracle that everyone at the gun range didn't end up dead once those guns started killing people.

Why didn't all the armed citizens prevent this?

Everyone was armed? Wayne? NRA, where are you? Why didn't the armed citizens take this guy out? Were they all untrained cowards or shocked, or sympathetic to the shooter? wtf?

Armed Citizens Fail NRA Test: So much for protection argument(s)

One guess is a range is a good place to shoot someone. No one will pay attention to the shots.

The shots? People were being murdered and no one paid attention? I am kinda suspicious of that kind of reasoning...but...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Armed Citizens Fail NRA Test: So much for protection argument(s)

Gee, if only there was a "good guy with a gun" at the shooting range this never would have happened.
If there were not enough good guys with guns at a shooting range to keep him safe, how will more guns make us any safer?

It's a miracle that everyone at the gun range didn't end up dead once those guns started killing people.

Why didn't all the armed citizens prevent this?

Everyone was armed? Wayne? NRA, where are you? Why didn't the armed citizens take this guy out? Were they all untrained cowards or shocked, or sympathetic to the shooter? wtf?

Armed Citizens Fail NRA Test: So much for protection argument(s)

and wtf are people with mental health issues doing with guns at shooting ranges?

 

[JoeB131]

He killed 125 people and you call him a good man?

Yep.
Not as good a man as Col. Paul Tibbets, but a good man none-the-less.

You mean the one who dropped a bomb on hundreds of thousands of women and children because we couldn't agree what surrender looked like?

Tibbets was a soldier doing is duty, I don't fault him.

But what we did at Hiroshima was nothing to be proud of. We bombed people who were already willing to give it up over a point we were willing to grant.

 

[Sallow]

Obama didn't start an illegal war and cause the deaths of thousands of innocent people, did he?

Nobody started an illegal war.

It is a serious violation of International Law to invade and occupy a non-aggressive nation.

(Excerpt)

Realistically, one cannot seriously expect the disputants -- much less their national electorates -- to wade through numerous legal documents, most of which contain rigorous and not-occasionally tedious reasoning, to find the correct answer. Thus, it seems prudent to proceed directly to the world's most authoritative answer to our pressing question du jour: "Was the Iraq War legal, or illegal, under international law?"

And The World's Most Authoritative Answer Is ... Among the world's foremost experts in the field of international law, the overwhelming jurisprudential consensus is that the Anglo-American invasion, conquest, and occupation of Iraq constitute three phases of one illegal war of aggression.

(Close)

This is why the World Court at The Hague has indicted George W. Bush in absentia. If he travels abroad and is arrested he will be tried for crimes which could result in his being hanged -- as per Saddam Hussein.

Never happen.

 

[Sallow]

Nobody started an illegal war.

It is a serious violation of International Law to invade and occupy a non-aggressive nation.

(Excerpt)

Realistically, one cannot seriously expect the disputants -- much less their national electorates -- to wade through numerous legal documents, most of which contain rigorous and not-occasionally tedious reasoning, to find the correct answer. Thus, it seems prudent to proceed directly to the world's most authoritative answer to our pressing question du jour: "Was the Iraq War legal, or illegal, under international law?"

And The World's Most Authoritative Answer Is ... Among the world's foremost experts in the field of international law, the overwhelming jurisprudential consensus is that the Anglo-American invasion, conquest, and occupation of Iraq constitute three phases of one illegal war of aggression.

(Close)

This is why the World Court at The Hague has indicted George W. Bush in absentia. If he travels abroad and is arrested he will be tried for crimes which could result in his being hanged -- as per Saddam Hussein.

seriously? It doesn't matter that he was shooting at our men in the no-fly zone, attempted assasination of our President, and was guilty of bribing UN inspectors.

Nope.

Not one bit.

In any case..there's a benefit to being the former leader of the most powerful country in the world.

No one is going to grab him if he travels.

 

[skookerasbil]

He killed 125 people and you call him a good man?

Nobody cares what people from Scratchmyassville Australia think.

 

[skookerasbil]

He killed 125 people and you call him a good man?

Yep.
Not as good a man as Col. Paul Tibbets, but a good man none-the-less.

You mean the one who dropped a bomb on hundreds of thousands of women and children because we couldn't agree what surrender looked like?

Tibbets was a soldier doing is duty, I don't fault him.

But what we did at Hiroshima was nothing to be proud of. We bombed people who were already willing to give it up over a point we were willing to grant.

Thats right.....better we invaded with our boys and lose 250,000 to 1 million.

 

[JoeB131]

Yep.
Not as good a man as Col. Paul Tibbets, but a good man none-the-less.

You mean the one who dropped a bomb on hundreds of thousands of women and children because we couldn't agree what surrender looked like?

Tibbets was a soldier doing is duty, I don't fault him.

But what we did at Hiroshima was nothing to be proud of. We bombed people who were already willing to give it up over a point we were willing to grant.

Thats right.....better we invaded with our boys and lose 250,000 to 1 million.

Except the Japanese were willing to surrender without an invasion. All we had to do was promise that we wouldn't hang Hirohito. Which eventually, we ended up not doing, anyway.

The bombs also had nothing to do with Japan's surrender. The reason they surrendered was the USSR entered the Pacific war. We had already dropped tons of bombs on Japan, but the thought of the country being partitioned combined with no hope of keeping their Mainland Asian possessions forced their hand.

Ugly little secret, the USSR did more to win WWII than we ever did.

 

[Esmeralda]

He killed 125 people and you call him a good man?

160 and he did what his country asked of him.

Yes he was a hero

Although, I don't subscribe to it's teachings;

The Buddhist philosophy of "Karma" came to mind as I read about this incident........

I don't believe in karma. He died because of a gun being available to someone with mental problems.

He killed because he was in the military and did do what was asked of him in that position. I get the impression he enjoyed it, being a famous sharpshooter, killing so many people that way. It is one thing to do what you have to do as part of the military; it is another to do it because you love it. Comparisons have been made to 2 democratic presidents who have directed war operations. The comparison is not really apt because I doubt either took pleasure in killing people but did what they felt they had to do. As well, there are as many republican presidents who directed war operations, so singling out democrats is disingenuous.

I don't wish anything negative on this soldier or think he got what he deserved, nor do I think he wasn't a good man. What I do think is that he probably took pleasure in and was proud of his ability at sharp shooting and killing people, which, for me, negates the idea of him being a hero. He was a soldier and did his job. That's all.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Gee, if only there was a "good guy with a gun" at the shooting range this never would have happened.
If there were not enough good guys with guns at a shooting range to keep him safe, how will more guns make us any safer?

Pretty sure the place was empty. They weren't found for several hours.
And if thee was no one else on the line why would you think to go look if you were inside and heard gunfire?
It being a gun range and all....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

His gun did NOT Protect the best shot in the world

Not much you can do when you're ambushed.
Safest place for this ass is in protective custody........A whole lot of pissed off shooters out there.
I say let him out on a personal recog bond. And do a press release about it.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Rip.

Was that the sound the bullet made?

Nope ..more of a deep slapping sound.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It is a bit surprising that someone so involved in killing was still interested in playing with weapons.

You go with what you know. It's no surprise he's into firearms.
It be stupid for him not to be.

 

[Too Tall]

Obama didn't start an illegal war and cause the deaths of thousands of innocent people, did he?

Nobody started an illegal war.

It is a serious violation of International Law to invade and occupy a non-aggressive nation.

(Excerpt)

Realistically, one cannot seriously expect the disputants -- much less their national electorates -- to wade through numerous legal documents, most of which contain rigorous and not-occasionally tedious reasoning, to find the correct answer. Thus, it seems prudent to proceed directly to the world's most authoritative answer to our pressing question du jour: "Was the Iraq War legal, or illegal, under international law?"

And The World's Most Authoritative Answer Is ... Among the world's foremost experts in the field of international law, the overwhelming jurisprudential consensus is that the Anglo-American invasion, conquest, and occupation of Iraq constitute three phases of one illegal war of aggression.

(Close)

This is why the World Court at The Hague has indicted George W. Bush in absentia. If he travels abroad and is arrested he will be tried for crimes which could result in his being hanged -- as per Saddam Hussein.

When is the World Court going to indict Obama for the numerous murders of civilians using drones that he has authorized in Pakistan,Yemen and Somalia?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Armed Citizens Fail NRA Test: So much for protection argument(s)

It's a miracle that everyone at the gun range didn't end up dead once those guns started killing people.

Why didn't all the armed citizens prevent this?

Everyone was armed? Wayne? NRA, where are you? Why didn't the armed citizens take this guy out? Were they all untrained cowards or shocked, or sympathetic to the shooter? wtf?

Armed Citizens Fail NRA Test: So much for protection argument(s)

and wtf are people with mental health issues doing with guns at shooting ranges?

veterans with mental health issues are walking around armed and angry?

what a fucking country we live in, huh?