McDonald Shooting: Justifiable ? Or Not ?

[protectionist]

How is shooting him 16 times justifiable? On what planet?

Moot question. If a suspect is already dead, after 2 shots, what difference does 14 more shots make ? Why ask ? It doesn't correlate with a 1st degree murder charge. Only the first shot is related to that.

 

[JoeB131]

You can't believe it?....rahm emanuel had an election to win.....so of course they didn't release the video.....

I think he, Alvarez and McCarthy all need to resign. Tomorrow.

 

[2aguy]

You can't believe it?....rahm emanuel had an election to win.....so of course they didn't release the video.....

I think he, Alvarez and McCarthy all need to resign. Tomorrow.

Then follow that up with every democrat in Chicago holding political office.....that would fix things right up......

 

[protectionist]

.It will be as if the jury will be saying, "protectionist, you stupid fuck, he committed murder, and now he will be committed for it."

HA HA. This dumbass post was already refuted before it was posted (by the very post that it quoted)

 

[Neser Boha]

How is shooting him 16 times justifiable? On what planet?

Moot question. If a suspect is already dead, after 2 shots, what difference does 14 more shots make ? Why ask ? It doesn't correlate with a 1st degree murder charge. Only the first shot is related to that.

There's something very wrong with you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

protectionist is full square ding a ling, Neser Boha, have no doubt about it.

He is the loony who thinks the Constitution and the USSC outlaws Islam a religion.

 

[JoeB131]

Then follow that up with every democrat in Chicago holding political office.....that would fix things right up......

Are you some kind of fucking retard? No, wait, we've established that.

I actually want to hold these three politicians accountable FOR WHAT THEY DID. They covered up this incident for political purposes.

You on the other hand, are a partisan retard who lives in mortal fear the majority of us who don't compensate with guns might take away yours.

 

[protectionist]

protectionist is full square ding a ling, Neser Boha, have no doubt about it.

He is the loony who thinks the Constitution and the USSC outlaws Islam a religion.

The fact that you come in here and claim it doesn't confirms YOUR loonieness. Imagine, a person claiming that the Supremacy clause doesn't proclaim supremacy (over all other law) Sheeesh!

 

[protectionist]

Are you some kind of fucking retard? No, wait, we've established that.

I actually want to hold these three politicians accountable FOR WHAT THEY DID. They covered up this incident for political purposes.

You on the other hand, are a partisan retard who lives in mortal fear the majority of us who don't compensate with guns might take away yours.

Just curious. Why would you not have a gun ? And why do you use the word "compensate" , instead of DEFEND ?

 

[protectionist]

There's something very wrong with you.

So say illegal alien invaders, Muslim jihadists, affirmative action racists, criminals of all types, queers who pretend their lifestyle is normal, cop haters, and other assorted miscreants. If they said I was correct, I'd be worried.

 

[blackhawk]

You might and I can not stress the word might enough be able to justify the first two shots by the officer but not the fourteen that followed.

 

[JoeB131]

Just curious. Why would you not have a gun ? And why do you use the word "compensate" , instead of DEFEND ?

I was in the Army for 11 years. I've handled plenty of firearms, thanks.

I use the word "Compensate" for a reason. As in "That Gun Owner is compensating for his tiny dick".

Guns are almost never used in self defense. Of some 33,000 gun fatalities last year, only 200 of them were civilian gun owners shooting someone in "justifiable self-defense".

 

[2aguy]

Just curious. Why would you not have a gun ? And why do you use the word "compensate" , instead of DEFEND ?

I was in the Army for 11 years. I've handled plenty of firearms, thanks.

I use the word "Compensate" for a reason. As in "That Gun Owner is compensating for his tiny dick".

Guns are almost never used in self defense. Of some 33,000 gun fatalities last year, only 200 of them were civilian gun owners shooting someone in "justifiable self-defense".

You are a twit.......guns were used to actually murder people 8,124 times....the majority were criminals murdering other criminals.....there were 505 accidental gun deaths in 2013, the last year for stats till 2014 comes out......

Americans used guns 1.5 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack according to bill clinton and the study he commissioned through his department of justice.....

the rest are suicides.......and of course since Japan, South Korea and China have absolute gun control....they also have 2x the suicide rate that we do.....

of the 1.5 million times guns are used to stop crime...according to bill clinton, that only 260 some, latest numbers, were used to kill violent criminal sociopaths who pushed their attack to the point where lethal force was needed...shows without doubt that normal American gun owners only shoot when they have to...not on a whim or out of loss of control.....

most gun defenses never require that a shot be fired...that you are too stupid to realize that from the actual research is typical of a left wing gun grabber...

 

[protectionist]

You might and I can not stress the word might enough be able to justify the first two shots by the officer but not the fourteen that followed.

The first 2 are all that are needed to void the 1st degree murder charge. The additional shots don't connect to the charge.

 

[protectionist]

I was in the Army for 11 years. I've handled plenty of firearms, thanks.

I use the word "Compensate" for a reason. As in "That Gun Owner is compensating for his tiny dick".

Guns are almost never used in self defense. Of some 33,000 gun fatalities last year, only 200 of them were civilian gun owners shooting someone in "justifiable self-defense".

I see little or no relevance in the numerical comparison you mention. 33,000 gun fatalities - so what ? I've had my gun for 40 years, and never shot somebody. That doesn't mean I don't need it for self-defense, one iota.

Why don't you tell us how many people got killed who DIDN'T have a gun for self-defense ? You could start with the 13 soldiers in Fort Hood, TX killed by Nidal Hasan. Then the victims of the recent Chatanooga, TN recruiting center shootings. Then the Aurora, CO theater shooting (another gun-free zone). And then the recent Paris killings. ANd many thousands more, going on continuously for years.

And how about the 2002 LAX shooting ? The terrorist was killed instantly by one shot at him, after he shot and killed 2 people and wounded 3 others. But he had 2 guns and 200 rounds on him, in an airport filled with people. If there had not been someone there with a gun to stop him, there would have been a bloodbath.

 

[JakeStarkey]

protectionist is simply an abnormal misanthrope.

 

[JoeB131]

You are a twit.......guns were used to actually murder people 8,124 times....

More like 11,000 time, and the Suicides and Accidents are just as dead and just as tragic.

of the 1.5 million times guns are used to stop crime.

Never happens. Repeating bullshit doesn't make it stink less, Tiny.

 

[JoeB131]

I see little or no relevance in the numerical comparison you mention. 33,000 gun fatalities - so what ? I've had my gun for 40 years, and never shot somebody. That doesn't mean I don't need it for self-defense, one iota.

Well, no, you don't. Because guns don't make you safe. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

Why don't you tell us how many people got killed who DIDN'T have a gun for self-defense ? You could start with the 13 soldiers in Fort Hood, TX killed by Nidal Hasan. Then the victims of the recent Chatanooga, TN recruiting center shootings. Then the Aurora, CO theater shooting (another gun-free zone). And then the recent Paris killings. ANd many thousands more, going on continuously for years.

Okay, let's look at that. Fort Hood was a military base. Thousands of guys with guns on Fort Hood. Armed guards at the gates. All it took for Nidal Hasan to beat that was a little planning and inside knowledge.

Aurora Theater- That shooting was over in about a minute, and most of the people there thought it was part of the show until they saw the blood. Reality is, most of these kinds of tragedies are over before anyone realizes what is going on. It's why you never hear about the mass shooter being stopped by a gun-owner.

Rest of the world has figured this out. They limit who can own a gun.

 

[2aguy]

I was in the Army for 11 years. I've handled plenty of firearms, thanks.

I use the word "Compensate" for a reason. As in "That Gun Owner is compensating for his tiny dick".

Guns are almost never used in self defense. Of some 33,000 gun fatalities last year, only 200 of them were civilian gun owners shooting someone in "justifiable self-defense".

I see little or no relevance in the numerical comparison you mention. 33,000 gun fatalities - so what ? I've had my gun for 40 years, and never shot somebody. That doesn't mean I don't need it for self-defense, one iota.

Why don't you tell us how many people got killed who DIDN'T have a gun for self-defense ? You could start with the 13 soldiers in Fort Hood, TX killed by Nidal Hasan. Then the victims of the recent Chatanooga, TN recruiting center shootings. Then the Aurora, CO theater shooting (another gun-free zone). And then the recent Paris killings. ANd many thousands more, going on continuously for years.

And how about the 2002 LAX shooting ? The terrorist was killed instantly by one shot at him, after he shot and killed 2 people and wounded 3 others. But he had 2 guns and 200 rounds on him, in an airport filled with people. If there had not been someone there with a gun to stop him, there would have been a bloodbath.

Don't forget the muslims who attacked the draw mohammed cartoon event....there was a police officer there, but he had a gun...two shots, two hits, two kills.....lucky....sure....but a gun, right there ended the killing....

 

[2aguy]

I see little or no relevance in the numerical comparison you mention. 33,000 gun fatalities - so what ? I've had my gun for 40 years, and never shot somebody. That doesn't mean I don't need it for self-defense, one iota.

Well, no, you don't. Because guns don't make you safe. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

Why don't you tell us how many people got killed who DIDN'T have a gun for self-defense ? You could start with the 13 soldiers in Fort Hood, TX killed by Nidal Hasan. Then the victims of the recent Chatanooga, TN recruiting center shootings. Then the Aurora, CO theater shooting (another gun-free zone). And then the recent Paris killings. ANd many thousands more, going on continuously for years.

Okay, let's look at that. Fort Hood was a military base. Thousands of guys with guns on Fort Hood. Armed guards at the gates. All it took for Nidal Hasan to beat that was a little planning and inside knowledge.

Aurora Theater- That shooting was over in about a minute, and most of the people there thought it was part of the show until they saw the blood. Reality is, most of these kinds of tragedies are over before anyone realizes what is going on. It's why you never hear about the mass shooter being stopped by a gun-owner.

Rest of the world has figured this out. They limit who can own a gun.

The 43 times number is a lie.....has been shown to be a lie and the idiot had to retract that number...and again...most of the killing in the home is because the shooter in the home has a long history of anti social, violent behavior, alcohol or drug abuse and/or a long history of crime....

Put a gun in the home of normal people...and no one is going to murder anyone...you know this and that you keep posting the lie makes you vile....

And notice that in the Fort Hood shooting, as I have posted before......he did not go to the live fire range, where soldiers were armed and ready...he did not go to the Military Police station where the police had guns on their hips.....

No...he targeted one of the many places on post where no one was armed.....and it took someone coming there with a gun to stop him.....

Had those military people been allowed to carry sidearms, he would have been stopped.

The theater shooter....picked a gun free zone.....how do we know this...because he allowed his notes to be found by police.....he planned on going to an airport, but decided against it because of the armed security there.....had there been a good chance of armed people at the theater...he would have chosen another target......

You can actually see his notes......there are links to it...