martybegan
Diamond Member
- Apr 5, 2010
- 84,036
- 34,940
- 2,300
The best thing to do is arm all law-abiding citizens. Then we wouldn't need to rely so much on police.
Since the NRA is opposed to any restrictions on gun purchases by people who have not been convicted of a gun crime, and refers to everyone as a good guy with a gun, until after they have been convicted of a gun crime, the following article has been edited to reflect their policy.
Updated: Two more arrested in Hardin Co. robbery
Three Beaumontsuspectsgood guys with guns have been booked into Jefferson and Hardin county jails in connection with the robbery of a Hardin County store earlier this week.
Douglas John Martin, 21, a good guy with a gun and Shavonskie Ardoin, 23, a good guy with a gun are accused of demanding money and firing multiple shots inside Batson Grocery in Hardin County, causing damage to the store clerk's vehicle, according to Hardin County Sheriff Mark Davis.
Martin and Ardoin fled the store around 3:30 a.m. with a third suspect, 17-year-old Ashlae Daeshawn Roberts, Davis said.
The three took officers from Sour Lake, Beaumont and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office on a car chase that ended in Cheek, according to Davis.
Roberts, a good guy with a gun, was arrested for aggravated robbery. She was booked at the Hardin County Jail on a $250,000 bond.
Martin and Ardoin, two good guys with guns, who were in custody at the Jefferson County Correctional Facility on Thursday, ran into the woods after the chase and were found later Wednesday afternoon.
Ardoin's bond was set at $750,000 on an aggravated assault charge. He wasn't granted bond for a parole violation charge.
Martin was booked on an aggravated assault charge and a theft charge. His bonds add up to $800,000.
So none of these people had records?
Your inability to separate criminals from your law abiding fellow citizens is noted, comical and a bit sad.
No, they didn't have any record of crimes involving guns. It is sad that the NRA defends the right of people like this to buy all the guns they want until AFTER they are convicted of a crime.
So it would have been different if he had 50 vs 1?
The issue is people like you want to deny ME the right to even have a fucking revolver for home defense because of other people's bad acts.
How about you revoke my driver's license because someone else 3 towns over drove drunk one night?
These are not "good guys with guns", they are criminals. It highlights your issue with confusing your fellow law abiding citizens with them.
I'm not aware of anything I have done that might deny you the right to have a fucking revolver. I have a couple myself. I agree they are crooks. Perhaps you should contact the NRA to get them to change their definition of what that is.
So you are a guns for me and not for thee guy, eh?
Figures.
When NYC stops making me wait 6 months and pay $500 or so for a revolver permit, then we can talk about other gun laws, maybe.
Until then I have to assume every gun control idiot wants the laws to be like that, or even worse.
isn't there a thread about compromise going around?