Drunk teenager shoots at someone who could shoot back...and was a good shot...big mistake...

[Pogo]

Philadelphia....democrat mayors since 1952...sure, they aren't the problem....

List of mayors of Philadelphia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Mayors of cities everywhere are usually Democrats. It's how they're organized. And we've done this before.
Political philosophies don't address neighborhoods, or cities. Local areas are run by just that --- LOCALS. What political party they associate with is simply the vehicle to get them into power. On the city level that means using the Democratic Party to get there, even if you're a Republican like Frank Rizzo in Philadelphia or Ray Nagin in New Orleans. Just as if you're looking for power in the suburbs you'll have more success using the Republican Party. Just as if you ran for anything in the South for a century after the Civil War, you either ran as a Democrat or you lost. It's how the channels to power are organized.

Amazingly, before a century or so ago, cities grew up and administered themselves with mayors and councilmembers who had no party affiliation at all. How'd they manage to do that? Don't you need a DNC or RNC official to tell you what day is the proper Democratic or Republican day to have the trash picked up? How do you essplain this?

Basically what you're trying to do here is the same as if a drunk climbs into his Pontiac, runs somebody over, you want to blame Pontiac Motor Division instead of the driver. Doesn't work.


Now, you might want to explore why Republicans can't get elected in cities or Democrats can't get elected in suburbs, but that's a whole different question.

 

[2aguy]

Philadelphia....democrat mayors since 1952...sure, they aren't the problem....

List of mayors of Philadelphia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Mayors of cities everywhere are usually Democrats. It's how they're organized. And we've done this before.
Political philosophies don't address neighborhoods, or cities. Local areas are run by just that --- LOCALS. What political party they associate with is simply the vehicle to get them into power. On the city level that means using the Democratic Party to get there, even if you're a Republican like Frank Rizzo in Philadelphia or Ray Nagin in New Orleans. Just as if you're looking for power in the suburbs you'll have more success using the Republican Party. Just as if you ran for anything in the South for a century after the Civil War, you either ran as a Democrat or you lost. It's how the channels to power are organized.

Amazingly, before a century or so ago, cities grew up and administered themselves with mayors and councilmembers who had no party affiliation at all. How'd they manage to do that? Don't you need a DNC or RNC official to tell you what day is the proper Democratic or Republican day to have the trash picked up? How do you essplain this?

Basically what you're trying to do here is the same as if a drunk climbs into his Pontiac, runs somebody over, you want to blame Pontiac Motor Division instead of the driver. Doesn't work.


Now, you might want to explore why Republicans can't get elected in cities or Democrats can't get elected in suburbs, but that's a whole different question.

democrat views on taxes, welfare, law enforcement and business create the environment that creates crime.......it is distinct to the democrats and it creates the gang recruiting cesspools in these inner cities...

 

[Pogo]

Philadelphia....democrat mayors since 1952...sure, they aren't the problem....

List of mayors of Philadelphia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Mayors of cities everywhere are usually Democrats. It's how they're organized. And we've done this before.
Political philosophies don't address neighborhoods, or cities. Local areas are run by just that --- LOCALS. What political party they associate with is simply the vehicle to get them into power. On the city level that means using the Democratic Party to get there, even if you're a Republican like Frank Rizzo in Philadelphia or Ray Nagin in New Orleans. Just as if you're looking for power in the suburbs you'll have more success using the Republican Party. Just as if you ran for anything in the South for a century after the Civil War, you either ran as a Democrat or you lost. It's how the channels to power are organized.

Amazingly, before a century or so ago, cities grew up and administered themselves with mayors and councilmembers who had no party affiliation at all. How'd they manage to do that? Don't you need a DNC or RNC official to tell you what day is the proper Democratic or Republican day to have the trash picked up? How do you essplain this?

Basically what you're trying to do here is the same as if a drunk climbs into his Pontiac, runs somebody over, you want to blame Pontiac Motor Division instead of the driver. Doesn't work.


Now, you might want to explore why Republicans can't get elected in cities or Democrats can't get elected in suburbs, but that's a whole different question.

democrat views on taxes, welfare, law enforcement and business create the environment that creates crime.......it is distinct to the democrats and it creates the gang recruiting cesspools in these inner cities...

Ah, that explains Ferguson.

Dumbass.

 

[2aguy]

Philadelphia....democrat mayors since 1952...sure, they aren't the problem....

List of mayors of Philadelphia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Mayors of cities everywhere are usually Democrats. It's how they're organized. And we've done this before.
Political philosophies don't address neighborhoods, or cities. Local areas are run by just that --- LOCALS. What political party they associate with is simply the vehicle to get them into power. On the city level that means using the Democratic Party to get there, even if you're a Republican like Frank Rizzo in Philadelphia or Ray Nagin in New Orleans. Just as if you're looking for power in the suburbs you'll have more success using the Republican Party. Just as if you ran for anything in the South for a century after the Civil War, you either ran as a Democrat or you lost. It's how the channels to power are organized.

Amazingly, before a century or so ago, cities grew up and administered themselves with mayors and councilmembers who had no party affiliation at all. How'd they manage to do that? Don't you need a DNC or RNC official to tell you what day is the proper Democratic or Republican day to have the trash picked up? How do you essplain this?

Basically what you're trying to do here is the same as if a drunk climbs into his Pontiac, runs somebody over, you want to blame Pontiac Motor Division instead of the driver. Doesn't work.


Now, you might want to explore why Republicans can't get elected in cities or Democrats can't get elected in suburbs, but that's a whole different question.

democrat views on taxes, welfare, law enforcement and business create the environment that creates crime.......it is distinct to the democrats and it creates the gang recruiting cesspools in these inner cities...

Ah, that explains Ferguson.

Dumbass.

Shithead, you can't find a list of Ferguson mayors so you can't tell.....but of the 24 most violent cities in the country 24 of the 25 have been run by democrats for decades......and cleveland goes back and forth, the only one not run exclusively by democrats....then you have Chicago, run by democrats, milwaukee, democrats....and New York, under Republican Mayor Rudy Guiliani actually got a handle on their crime...and now democrt deblasio is using left wing, democrat policies...and turning the city back into a cess pool.....

 

[Pogo]

Philadelphia....democrat mayors since 1952...sure, they aren't the problem....

List of mayors of Philadelphia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Mayors of cities everywhere are usually Democrats. It's how they're organized. And we've done this before.
Political philosophies don't address neighborhoods, or cities. Local areas are run by just that --- LOCALS. What political party they associate with is simply the vehicle to get them into power. On the city level that means using the Democratic Party to get there, even if you're a Republican like Frank Rizzo in Philadelphia or Ray Nagin in New Orleans. Just as if you're looking for power in the suburbs you'll have more success using the Republican Party. Just as if you ran for anything in the South for a century after the Civil War, you either ran as a Democrat or you lost. It's how the channels to power are organized.

Amazingly, before a century or so ago, cities grew up and administered themselves with mayors and councilmembers who had no party affiliation at all. How'd they manage to do that? Don't you need a DNC or RNC official to tell you what day is the proper Democratic or Republican day to have the trash picked up? How do you essplain this?

Basically what you're trying to do here is the same as if a drunk climbs into his Pontiac, runs somebody over, you want to blame Pontiac Motor Division instead of the driver. Doesn't work.


Now, you might want to explore why Republicans can't get elected in cities or Democrats can't get elected in suburbs, but that's a whole different question.

democrat views on taxes, welfare, law enforcement and business create the environment that creates crime.......it is distinct to the democrats and it creates the gang recruiting cesspools in these inner cities...

Ah, that explains Ferguson.

Dumbass.

Shithead, you can't find a list of Ferguson mayors so you can't tell.....but of the 24 most violent cities in the country 24 of the 25 have been run by democrats for decades......and cleveland goes back and forth, the only one not run exclusively by democrats....then you have Chicago, run by democrats, milwaukee, democrats....and New York, under Republican Mayor Rudy Guiliani actually got a handle on their crime...and now democrt deblasio is using left wing, democrat policies...and turning the city back into a cess pool.....

​

Dumb shit.

 

[2aguy]

Philadelphia....democrat mayors since 1952...sure, they aren't the problem....

List of mayors of Philadelphia - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Mayors of cities everywhere are usually Democrats. It's how they're organized. And we've done this before.
Political philosophies don't address neighborhoods, or cities. Local areas are run by just that --- LOCALS. What political party they associate with is simply the vehicle to get them into power. On the city level that means using the Democratic Party to get there, even if you're a Republican like Frank Rizzo in Philadelphia or Ray Nagin in New Orleans. Just as if you're looking for power in the suburbs you'll have more success using the Republican Party. Just as if you ran for anything in the South for a century after the Civil War, you either ran as a Democrat or you lost. It's how the channels to power are organized.

Amazingly, before a century or so ago, cities grew up and administered themselves with mayors and councilmembers who had no party affiliation at all. How'd they manage to do that? Don't you need a DNC or RNC official to tell you what day is the proper Democratic or Republican day to have the trash picked up? How do you essplain this?

Basically what you're trying to do here is the same as if a drunk climbs into his Pontiac, runs somebody over, you want to blame Pontiac Motor Division instead of the driver. Doesn't work.


Now, you might want to explore why Republicans can't get elected in cities or Democrats can't get elected in suburbs, but that's a whole different question.

democrat views on taxes, welfare, law enforcement and business create the environment that creates crime.......it is distinct to the democrats and it creates the gang recruiting cesspools in these inner cities...

Ah, that explains Ferguson.

Dumbass.

Shithead, you can't find a list of Ferguson mayors so you can't tell.....but of the 24 most violent cities in the country 24 of the 25 have been run by democrats for decades......and cleveland goes back and forth, the only one not run exclusively by democrats....then you have Chicago, run by democrats, milwaukee, democrats....and New York, under Republican Mayor Rudy Guiliani actually got a handle on their crime...and now democrt deblasio is using left wing, democrat policies...and turning the city back into a cess pool.....

​

Dumb shit.

Yes...the fact that the most violent cities in the country, not the top 10 or even the top 20 but all the way up to the top 25 most violent cities in the country are all run be democrats.....yeah, nothing ot see here....

 

[Ernie S.]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I agree with you. Though on point 2 I would just say it is typically better to walk away. But as you say the victim doesn't have to walk away.

Better to walk away?????? There was a drunk gangbanger SHOOTING at him. Walking away when you have a gun?

Who ever accused Leftists of having street smarts? Their fantasy of how the world should work is so convincing that they will turn their back on an armed and shooting assailant. And even as the life seeps out of their stupid bodies, they'll still cling to the movie in their heads.

I'm pretty sure words were said by both parties before shooting began. And if the right words were used there would have been no shooting. Instead they both had guns and decided to talk with them endangering everyone in the area.

You're pretty sure? The words were get off my block followed by gunfire. I suppose if the drunk ganngbanger said "Welcome to my block" and didn't start shooting, things would have turned out better for him.

BUT... to blame this on anyone but the drunk teenager is Liberal ludicrous.

 

[Brain357]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I agree with you. Though on point 2 I would just say it is typically better to walk away. But as you say the victim doesn't have to walk away.

Better to walk away?????? There was a drunk gangbanger SHOOTING at him. Walking away when you have a gun?

Who ever accused Leftists of having street smarts? Their fantasy of how the world should work is so convincing that they will turn their back on an armed and shooting assailant. And even as the life seeps out of their stupid bodies, they'll still cling to the movie in their heads.

I'm pretty sure words were said by both parties before shooting began. And if the right words were used there would have been no shooting. Instead they both had guns and decided to talk with them endangering everyone in the area.

You're pretty sure? The words were get off my block followed by gunfire. I suppose if the drunk ganngbanger said "Welcome to my block" and didn't start shooting, things would have turned out better for him.

BUT... to blame this on anyone but the drunk teenager is Liberal ludicrous.

Not blaming. The drunk was clearly the worse of the two.

 

[Brain357]

Mayors of cities everywhere are usually Democrats. It's how they're organized. And we've done this before.
Political philosophies don't address neighborhoods, or cities. Local areas are run by just that --- LOCALS. What political party they associate with is simply the vehicle to get them into power. On the city level that means using the Democratic Party to get there, even if you're a Republican like Frank Rizzo in Philadelphia or Ray Nagin in New Orleans. Just as if you're looking for power in the suburbs you'll have more success using the Republican Party. Just as if you ran for anything in the South for a century after the Civil War, you either ran as a Democrat or you lost. It's how the channels to power are organized.

Amazingly, before a century or so ago, cities grew up and administered themselves with mayors and councilmembers who had no party affiliation at all. How'd they manage to do that? Don't you need a DNC or RNC official to tell you what day is the proper Democratic or Republican day to have the trash picked up? How do you essplain this?

Basically what you're trying to do here is the same as if a drunk climbs into his Pontiac, runs somebody over, you want to blame Pontiac Motor Division instead of the driver. Doesn't work.


Now, you might want to explore why Republicans can't get elected in cities or Democrats can't get elected in suburbs, but that's a whole different question.

democrat views on taxes, welfare, law enforcement and business create the environment that creates crime.......it is distinct to the democrats and it creates the gang recruiting cesspools in these inner cities...

Ah, that explains Ferguson.

Dumbass.

Shithead, you can't find a list of Ferguson mayors so you can't tell.....but of the 24 most violent cities in the country 24 of the 25 have been run by democrats for decades......and cleveland goes back and forth, the only one not run exclusively by democrats....then you have Chicago, run by democrats, milwaukee, democrats....and New York, under Republican Mayor Rudy Guiliani actually got a handle on their crime...and now democrt deblasio is using left wing, democrat policies...and turning the city back into a cess pool.....

​

Dumb shit.

Yes...the fact that the most violent cities in the country, not the top 10 or even the top 20 but all the way up to the top 25 most violent cities in the country are all run be democrats.....yeah, nothing ot see here....

And like 99% of big cities have democrat mayors. I agree with pogo, dem or repub really doesn't matter at a city level.

Heck at a national level their policies really aren't that different.

 

[Andylusion]

With any luck he wont wake up, it will go from a good job to a fantastic job.

Yeah, I'm all for dead criminals. At this point, prison is just social networking for criminals. Death is the only real fix... unless we reform the prison system.

 

[Andylusion]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I don't care what you think. Not one bit.

Some of us good people in society.... are sick and tired of being victimized by criminals, and having trash like you, defend the criminals doing the abusing.

Quite frankly if he died, and everyone like you died... this nation would be a wonderful place to live again.

 

[Brain357]

With any luck he wont wake up, it will go from a good job to a fantastic job.

Yeah, I'm all for dead criminals. At this point, prison is just social networking for criminals. Death is the only real fix at this point... unless we reform the prison system.

You think other countries have better prison systems? I feel like most don't come out reformed from ours. But I could be wrong on that.

 

[Andylusion]

With any luck he wont wake up, it will go from a good job to a fantastic job.

Yeah, I'm all for dead criminals. At this point, prison is just social networking for criminals. Death is the only real fix at this point... unless we reform the prison system.

You think other countries have better prison systems? I feel like most don't come out reformed from ours. But I could be wrong on that.

I don't remember mentioning 'other countries' at any point. I have no idea, and nor do I care. Clearly our prison system sucks.

60 Minutes intereview criminals who intentionally committed violent crime, specifically because they actually WANTED to go back to prison.

I don't want to "reform" them. I want to PUNISH THEM until the punishment is so horrific that they don't ever want to go back again for the rest of their lives.

When people intentionally break the law, specifically so they can get back into prison with their 'bros' and crap..... clearly it's not harming them enough.

Perhaps we could amputate hands for thieves. I'd be for it. If a politician offered up that as a solution, I'd vote for it.

Perhaps we can just flat out kill rapists and murders. That'll clean out a bunch of them.

And honestly, if you are convicted of the same act twice... they should just put a gun to their heads.

I'm tired of this crap. We've played the reform game the left has been pushing for 60 years. 2.5 Million people living off the tax payers THAT THEY ABUSED. They abuse the public, and then live for free off the public.

No. That's wrong. Immoral. Shoot em, cut off their hands, and make prison so bad, that they never want to go back. Screw reform. They can reform this 9mm bullet in their skull.

Yeah, I'm hard core. Tell me, have you come home to find your entire house ransacked and stuff broken or stolen, and then have to close all your bank accounts because they found your account information and started emptying it out?

No? Then shut up. I don't want to hear it.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I agree with you. Though on point 2 I would just say it is typically better to walk away. But as you say the victim doesn't have to walk away.

Walk away? Nah...I might run..... for cover that is,assuming it's close enough.
I'd much rather drop the turd from behind a telephone pole.
Even a drunk guy might get lucky.

 

[Brain357]

With any luck he wont wake up, it will go from a good job to a fantastic job.

Yeah, I'm all for dead criminals. At this point, prison is just social networking for criminals. Death is the only real fix at this point... unless we reform the prison system.

You think other countries have better prison systems? I feel like most don't come out reformed from ours. But I could be wrong on that.

I don't remember mentioning 'other countries' at any point. I have no idea, and nor do I care. Clearly our prison system sucks.

60 Minutes intereview criminals who intentionally committed violent crime, specifically because they actually WANTED to go back to prison.

I don't want to "reform" them. I want to PUNISH THEM until the punishment is so horrific that they don't ever want to go back again for the rest of their lives.

When people intentionally break the law, specifically so they can get back into prison with their 'bros' and crap..... clearly it's not harming them enough.

Perhaps we could amputate hands for thieves. I'd be for it. If a politician offered up that as a solution, I'd vote for it.

Perhaps we can just flat out kill rapists and murders. That'll clean out a bunch of them.

And honestly, if you are convicted of the same act twice... they should just put a gun to their heads.

I'm tired of this crap. We've played the reform game the left has been pushing for 60 years. 2.5 Million people living off the tax payers THAT THEY ABUSED. They abuse the public, and then live for free off the public.

No. That's wrong. Immoral. Shoot em, cut off their hands, and make prison so bad, that they never want to go back. Screw reform. They can reform this 9mm bullet in their skull.

Yeah, I'm hard core. Tell me, have you come home to find your entire house ransacked and stuff broken or stolen, and then have to close all your bank accounts because they found your account information and started emptying it out?

No? Then shut up. I don't want to hear it.

I didn't say you had mentioned other countries. Just figured if ours doesn't work then somebodies probably does. What makes you think your way would work? And I'm not saying it wouldn't. But does somebody do that now? I think many other countries are much better at reforming from what I have heard.

 

[Wake]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I don't care what you think. Not one bit.

Some of us good people in society.... are sick and tired of being victimized by criminals, and having trash like you, defend the criminals doing the abusing.

Quite frankly if he died, and everyone like you died... this nation would be a wonderful place to live again.

What a sick man you are.

You want me dead, because I don't think it's right to cheer for the deaths of others?

No one defended or excused the criminal's actions. You invented that.

So not only are you ignorant, you're sick. Good luck.

 

[Brain357]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I agree with you. Though on point 2 I would just say it is typically better to walk away. But as you say the victim doesn't have to walk away.

Walk away? Nah...I might run..... for cover that is,assuming it's close enough.
I'd much rather drop the turd from behind a telephone pole.
Even a drunk guy might get lucky.

Doesn't really require any luck. Guns are very easy, point and shoot. Just about anyone can do it and be very deadly.

 

[Andylusion]

With any luck he wont wake up, it will go from a good job to a fantastic job.

Yeah, I'm all for dead criminals. At this point, prison is just social networking for criminals. Death is the only real fix at this point... unless we reform the prison system.

You think other countries have better prison systems? I feel like most don't come out reformed from ours. But I could be wrong on that.

I don't remember mentioning 'other countries' at any point. I have no idea, and nor do I care. Clearly our prison system sucks.

60 Minutes intereview criminals who intentionally committed violent crime, specifically because they actually WANTED to go back to prison.

I don't want to "reform" them. I want to PUNISH THEM until the punishment is so horrific that they don't ever want to go back again for the rest of their lives.

When people intentionally break the law, specifically so they can get back into prison with their 'bros' and crap..... clearly it's not harming them enough.

Perhaps we could amputate hands for thieves. I'd be for it. If a politician offered up that as a solution, I'd vote for it.

Perhaps we can just flat out kill rapists and murders. That'll clean out a bunch of them.

And honestly, if you are convicted of the same act twice... they should just put a gun to their heads.

I'm tired of this crap. We've played the reform game the left has been pushing for 60 years. 2.5 Million people living off the tax payers THAT THEY ABUSED. They abuse the public, and then live for free off the public.

No. That's wrong. Immoral. Shoot em, cut off their hands, and make prison so bad, that they never want to go back. Screw reform. They can reform this 9mm bullet in their skull.

Yeah, I'm hard core. Tell me, have you come home to find your entire house ransacked and stuff broken or stolen, and then have to close all your bank accounts because they found your account information and started emptying it out?

No? Then shut up. I don't want to hear it.

I didn't say you had mentioned other countries. Just figured if ours doesn't work then somebodies probably does. What makes you think your way would work? And I'm not saying it wouldn't. But does somebody do that now? I think many other countries are much better at reforming from what I have heard.

Sure. Singapore. Singapore is rated one of the safest cities on the planet. Top tourist destination if you are single woman.

Of course, if you are caught there with drugs..... they hang you.

Oddly.... not much of a drug problem.... let alone rape or murder.

Absolutely... I'm 100% in favor of adopting the Singapore justice system.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I agree with you. Though on point 2 I would just say it is typically better to walk away. But as you say the victim doesn't have to walk away.

Walk away? Nah...I might run..... for cover that is,assuming it's close enough.
I'd much rather drop the turd from behind a telephone pole.
Even a drunk guy might get lucky.

Doesn't really require any luck. Guns are very easy, point and shoot. Just about anyone can do it and be very deadly.

Just that easy huh?

 

[Andylusion]

Respectfully, I think both you (Ernie), Brain, and (maybe?) Stephanie should alter your perspective on this.

1) No matter what, celebrating someone who is in critical condition and wanting the person to die is wrong. Callous at best.

2) People have a right to be armed, and no, the victim doesn't have to walk away or obey the words of a drunken punk.

3) I think the victim was in the right to defend himself, but I'm not rejoicing or cheering for the guy who attacked him to die. Gotta keep it within reason, or else you slide to one extreme or the other.

I don't care what you think. Not one bit.

Some of us good people in society.... are sick and tired of being victimized by criminals, and having trash like you, defend the criminals doing the abusing.

Quite frankly if he died, and everyone like you died... this nation would be a wonderful place to live again.

What a sick man you are.

You want me dead, because I don't think it's right to cheer for the deaths of others?

No one defended or excused the criminal's actions. You invented that.

So not only are you ignorant, you're sick. Good luck.

CRIMINALS.....

I don't want anyone to die. Here's a thought.... don't murder.... don't rape.... do violate the law.... in this case, don't pull a gun on someone.

This man pulled a lethal weapon on an innocent civilian. He is as close to a murderer as possible without succeeding. When you want people like that to not die.... you support murders.

When a criminal supporter like you, calls me sick.... I know I have the right idea. Anything that pisses off people who support criminals, is a plus in my book. Yes, you should die. All criminal supporters should die.

It used to be that if you were caught in the company of criminals, you hanged with them. We should go back to that.