Gun nuts intimidate mothers in parking lot

[Jarlaxle]

These images were not taken at the same time.

Within seconds. Every single person that can be identified is in the same relative position and posed the same way. No way you get a group that large to stay still for more that 2 or 3 seconds.

Look at the hats and look at the shadows. Unless you're just not interested, then don't bother. Hell, it took marty over half an hour to finally break down and look but once he did he decided to start trying to defend the "quick-change" that a couple of the guys did.

How hard is it to look at a photo and stage people in basically the same spots? Not hard at all, especially when we don't have the original front view photo that they were obviously posing for when the side view shot was taken for comparison. They did forget to pay attention to the shadows though so maybe it is hard for some people.

I just looked, so did my wife: nobody's hat changed.

 

[Ernie S.]

Again with the minutiae. I've no interest in getting into a discussion over whether, at some point in the history of mankind, a child has been rescued from some situation by a drunk driver.

Because that would be pointless and stupid..like most of your posts. And I certainly don't want to imitate you.

Then maybe you shouldn't traffic in absolutes.

OK then. Suppose some child HAS been saved by a drunk driver. Could the same result been obtained if the driver was sober? Yes. Of course. Now How many unarmed citizens have shot and killed a would be child killer?

You see, in one case, the gun is relevant and in the other, the alcohol is not. Poor analogy.

 

[Ernie S.]

I looked at every hat in both pictures, no one changed their hats.

But they're all tinfoil.

Take it up with the guy that insists they changed.

He ran from me too. He promised to reveal which men had changed their hats if someone sent him a PM. All I got was... well, I got nothing.

 

[Ernie S.]

Then maybe you shouldn't traffic in absolutes.

I imagine you think you've made a point there.

But you haven't. The only point you've made is that you cannot argue the real issue intelligently, without seizing on minutiae and diverting attention from the substance of the discussion.

If you are so easily distracted then you aren't up to snuff anyway.

It must suck to lose the argument over and over and over.

::at pat:::

You would know.

 

[Ernie S.]

Is the 629 the new titanium-frame Model 29?

No it's the stainless or nickel plaited. Mine is the nickel with 6" barrel. It's a friggin cannon. I can't imagine firing a titanium framed .44. The kick must be incredible. Mine weighs 4 pounds loaded and since I had a plate and screws put in my right arm, I have to fire it with a weird grip that sends recoil to my left hand.

Other than the finish, yours sounds like mine: I also have a Model 29 with a 6" barrel, but in S&W's old (and now rather worn) milk-blue finish. Kick isn't too bad. IIRC, the titanium 29 weighs 18 ounces unloaded.

That must be quite a handful. A .44 needs some steel to help with the recoil
Mine is 38 oz empty, A bit more with the custom zebra wood grips I made for it. I had problems with it coming up and to the right on recoil. It made getting back on target a problem. I made the right side grip about 3/32 thicker that the left side, and it comes straight up.
6 rounds in a 6" circle in 4 seconds when I was shooting a lot.
Since I busted my right arm, it hurts too much to play with it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Then maybe you shouldn't traffic in absolutes.

I imagine you think you've made a point there.

But you haven't. The only point you've made is that you cannot argue the real issue intelligently, without seizing on minutiae and diverting attention from the substance of the discussion.

If you are so easily distracted then you aren't up to snuff anyway.

It must suck to lose the argument over and over and over.

::at pat:::

I guess you can explain it to he how it actually feels.

 

[Pogo]

Again with the minutiae. I've no interest in getting into a discussion over whether, at some point in the history of mankind, a child has been rescued from some situation by a drunk driver.

Because that would be pointless and stupid..like most of your posts. And I certainly don't want to imitate you.

Then maybe you shouldn't traffic in absolutes.

OK then. Suppose some child HAS been saved by a drunk driver. Could the same result been obtained if the driver was sober? Yes. Of course. Now How many unarmed citizens have shot and killed a would be child killer?

You see, in one case, the gun is relevant and in the other, the alcohol is not. Poor analogy.

I know. It wasn't my analogy, although I thought it superficially clever at first read, though wasn't to be taken seriously.

But then, that's not what I was posting on. Koshergrrrrr made a rash specious absolute statement, I called her on it, and she lost. Again.
You'd think she'd figure her own pattern out by now. You'd think.

 

[Pogo]

I imagine you think you've made a point there.

But you haven't. The only point you've made is that you cannot argue the real issue intelligently, without seizing on minutiae and diverting attention from the substance of the discussion.

If you are so easily distracted then you aren't up to snuff anyway.

It must suck to lose the argument over and over and over.

::at pat:::

I guess you can explain it to he how it actually feels.

Not necessary. I showed her.
Not that it's anything new...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Just to let everybody in this discussion know what they are arguing about.

 

[Borillar]

Good. Their intimidation was met with a higher level of intimidation. That's excellent. I'll intimidate anyone who tries to restrict my Constitutional rights.

Why do you fools insist on saying stupid crap like this?

This gang of heavily armed thugs in a parking lot outside a restaurant restricts other people's right to safety. Look at that photo.

The people who want to eat there as well as the owners of the restaurant and any passersby have the right to be safe from gangs of armed thugs.

OTOH, at least they have the gumption to open carry so people can choose to get to a safer place.

What's funny to me is that if they were all black, you hypocritical nutters would be screeching a different tune.

A couple black guys with nightsticks is intimidating, but a platoon of open carry militia nuts is fine and dandy.

 

[idb]

Just to let everybody in this discussion know what they are arguing about.

Were they there as a counter-protest to the Mums?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Good. Their intimidation was met with a higher level of intimidation. That's excellent. I'll intimidate anyone who tries to restrict my Constitutional rights.

Why do you fools insist on saying stupid crap like this?

This gang of heavily armed thugs in a parking lot outside a restaurant restricts other people's right to safety. Look at that photo.

The people who want to eat there as well as the owners of the restaurant and any passersby have the right to be safe from gangs of armed thugs.

OTOH, at least they have the gumption to open carry so people can choose to get to a safer place.

What's funny to me is that if they were all black, you hypocritical nutters would be screeching a different tune.

A couple black guys with nightsticks is intimidating, but a platoon of open carry militia nuts is fine and dandy.

Actually it depends on their intention. The thugs were intending to stop certain people from voting. The group was supporting the Constitution

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Just to let everybody in this discussion know what they are arguing about.

Were they there as a counter-protest to the Mums?

irrelevant this thread is based on a lie.

 

[Pogo]

Why do you fools insist on saying stupid crap like this?

This gang of heavily armed thugs in a parking lot outside a restaurant restricts other people's right to safety. Look at that photo.

The people who want to eat there as well as the owners of the restaurant and any passersby have the right to be safe from gangs of armed thugs.

OTOH, at least they have the gumption to open carry so people can choose to get to a safer place.

What's funny to me is that if they were all black, you hypocritical nutters would be screeching a different tune.

A couple black guys with nightsticks is intimidating, but a platoon of open carry militia nuts is fine and dandy.

Actually it depends on their intention. The thugs were intending to stop certain people from voting. The group was supporting the Constitution

No, I think that's bullshit. You watch too much Fox Noise.

Let's see, that was around the same time... what was the pattern they were doing to make news stories out of nothing...

"New Black Panthers"... Henry Louis Gates... Shirley Sherrod... ACORN... Jeremiah Wright... Van Jones... nope, no pattern there, sure don't see one.

The Constitution doesn't need "support" -- it passed two centuries ago. What are the guns for? And why are they loaded?

 

[Pogo]

Just to let everybody in this discussion know what they are arguing about.

Were they there as a counter-protest to the Mums?

irrelevant this thread is based on a lie.

Why they were there is "irrelevant"?

Do they know that? Must feel pretty silly...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Were they there as a counter-protest to the Mums?

irrelevant this thread is based on a lie.

Why they were there is "irrelevant"?

Do they know that? Must feel pretty silly...

Pretty silly as the lie this thread is.
the thread is based on the photo the photo was and is a lie.,
THE END.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

a couple black guys with nightsticks is intimidating, but a platoon of open carry militia nuts is fine and dandy.

actually it depends on their intention. The thugs were intending to stop certain people from voting. The group was supporting the constitution

no, i think that's bullshit. You watch too much fox noise.

Let's see, that was around the same time... What was the pattern they were doing to make news stories out of nothing...

"new black panthers"... Henry louis gates... Shirley sherrod... Acorn... Jeremiah wright... Van jones... Nope, no pattern there, sure don't see one.

The constitution doesn't need "support" -- it passed two centuries ago. What are the guns for? And why are they loaded?

horse shit group of hunter back from the hunt decide to stop and get a bite to eat. Some whacked out bitches group is their who knew right?

 

[Gracie]

 

[bigrebnc1775]

 

[Noomi]

Just to let everybody in this discussion know what they are arguing about.

I don't believe anything I read on anti abortion websites either but I am willing to bet that you do.