McDonald Shooting: Justifiable ? Or Not ?

[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.

Yeah...France figured it out too...but their criminals don't care that they "figured it out" and just go and buy whatever guns they want....as the Charlie Hebdo, Jewish synagogue, and Paris shootings show...as do the robberies and the shootings in Marseilles show...and they prefer fully automatic rifles in Europe and France.....which are completely, totally illegal.....and these guys were all on government, terrorist watch lists......and still got their guns...

 

[protectionist]

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.

1. A gun in the home is not more likely to kill a family member in MY home. Maybe that could be true of some people, if they're stupid. But as is the case with everything in life, DON'T BE STUPID.

2. You haven't refuted what I said about Fort Hood. The soldiers that Hasan shot were unarmed. If they had been armed they would be alive. Hasan would be dead. This is an intelligent forum. Don't think you can get by with idiotic BS. You can't.

3. NO, you don't hear about the mass shooter being stopped by a gun-owner, because the places where the mass shootings occur are gun-free zones, and if gun owners are there, they aren't carrying their guns. And a minute is a long time for a mass shooting. If I had my pistol and I saw some jerk shooting at people I'd shoot him, and that would be within a few seconds after he started.. That's exactly what DID happen in the case of Hesham Mohammed Hadayet, a Muslim terrorist who shot and killed 2 people and wounded 3 others in LA Airport in 2002. The jihadist had 2 handguns and extra ammunition and magazines loaded with bullets. If someone (anyone) had not stopped him, there would have been a bloodbath in a crowed airport (6000 people)

3. The "rest of the world" includes Paris, France. And what they recentty found out is, that if you don't have law-abiding gun owners, armed with guns, you get massacres of unarmed defenseless people. Look for France to re-evaluate their gun-free zone policy. If they aren't crazy.

 

[2aguy]

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.

1. A gun in the home is not more likely to kill a family member in MY home. Maybe that could be true of some people, if they're stupid. But as is the case with everything in life, DON'T BE STUPID.

2. You haven't refuted what I said about Fort Hood. The soldiers that Hasan shot were unarmed. If they had been armed they would be alive. Hasan would be dead. This is an intelligent forum. Don't think you can get by with idiotic BS. You can't.

3. NO, you don't hear about the mass shooter being stopped by a gun-owner, because the places where the mass shootings occur are gun-free zones, and if gun owners are there, they aren't carrying their guns. And a minute is a long time for a mass shooting. If I had my pistol and I saw some jerk shooting at people I'd shoot him, and that would be within a few seconds after he started.. That's exactly what DID happen in the case of Hesham Mohammed Hadayet, a Muslim terrorist who shot and killed 2 people and wounded 3 others in LA Airport in 2002. The jihadist had 2 handguns and extra ammunition and magazines loaded with bullets. If someone (anyone) had not stopped him, there would have been a bloodbath in a crowed airport (6000 people)

3. The "rest of the world" includes Paris, France. And what they recentty found out is, that if you don't have law-abiding gun owners, armed with guns, you get massacres of unarmed defenseless people. Look for France to re-evaluate their gun-free zone policy. If they aren't crazy.

Bravo.....well done....

 

[protectionist]

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...

Of course. Gun laws have no effect on criminals. They will get their gun with or without gun laws. The only thing that significantly changes the picture is gun laws that restrict gun carrying, thereby giving criminals free rein to go out and massacre crowds of people. How dumb can liberals be ? Sheeesh!!

 

[2aguy]

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...

Of course. Gun laws have no effect on criminals. They will get their gun with or without gun laws. The only thing that significantly changes the picture is gun laws that restrict gun carrying, thereby giving criminals free rein to go out and massacre crowds of people. How dumb can liberals be ? Sheeesh!!

Oh....they can be very dumb.....they are going to vote for hilary...in large numbers.......very dumb indeed....

 

[protectionist]

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.

1. A gun in the home is not more likely to kill a family member in MY home. Maybe that could be true of some people, if they're stupid. But as is the case with everything in life, DON'T BE STUPID.

2. You haven't refuted what I said about Fort Hood. The soldiers that Hasan shot were unarmed. If they had been armed they would be alive. Hasan would be dead. This is an intelligent forum. Don't think you can get by with idiotic BS. You can't.

3. NO, you don't hear about the mass shooter being stopped by a gun-owner, because the places where the mass shootings occur are gun-free zones, and if gun owners are there, they aren't carrying their guns. And a minute is a long time for a mass shooting. If I had my pistol and I saw some jerk shooting at people I'd shoot him, and that would be within a few seconds after he started.. That's exactly what DID happen in the case of Hesham Mohammed Hadayet, a Muslim terrorist who shot and killed 2 people and wounded 3 others in LA Airport in 2002. The jihadist had 2 handguns and extra ammunition and magazines loaded with bullets. If someone (anyone) had not stopped him, there would have been a bloodbath in a crowed airport (6000 people). He was shot dead right there, averting catastrophe. Only because a good guy was there, armed, and ready to deal.

3. The "rest of the world" includes Paris, France. And what they recentty found out is, that if you don't have law-abiding gun owners, armed with guns, you get massacres of unarmed defenseless people. Look for France to re-evaluate their gun-free zone policy. If they aren't crazy.

 

[protectionist]

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....

Otherwise, 300 people could have been shot dead, but i suspect there were others in that crowd who were CCW armed also, and those 2 jihad nitwits would have been mincemeat.

 

[protectionist]

protectionist is simply an abnormal misanthrope.

Do you carry a gun ? This is gonna be good.

 

[JoeB131]

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....

Yes, TRAINED POLICE OFFICERS did a very good job when they were giving advanced warning of a possible attack.

Still doesn't justify you compensating for a tiny pecker.

 

[JoeB131]

Otherwise, 300 people could have been shot dead, but i suspect there were others in that crowd who were CCW armed also, and those 2 jihad nitwits would have been mincemeat.

300 racist assholes? No great loss.

 

[JoeB131]

The 43 times number is a lie.....has been shown to be a lie and the idiot had to retract that number...

Not, it hasn't and no, he didn't.

And if he got it wrong, why did the NRA shit their camo pants and demand the Government stop studying gun violence? It wasn't because they really believed that study was an outlyer.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah...France figured it out too...but their criminals don't care that they "figured it out" and just go and buy whatever guns they want....as the Charlie Hebdo, Jewish synagogue, and Paris shootings show...as do the robberies and the shootings in Marseilles show...and they prefer fully automatic rifles in Europe and France.....which are completely, totally illegal.....and these guys were all on government, terrorist watch lists......and still got their guns...

Yes, w hen you go to war with another country, they are going to find ways to strike back.

Maybe France should ahve thought of that before they went to war with ISIL.

 

[JoeB131]

1. A gun in the home is not more likely to kill a family member in MY home. Maybe that could be true of some people, if they're stupid. But as is the case with everything in life, DON'T BE STUPID.

Frankly, guy, given the crazy you've displayed here, I wouldn't put good money on that.

 

[JQPublic1]

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.

HA HA! I seriously doubt if "Protectionist's Law" holds up in any court room setting! Although the first two shots might have been fatal, the officer firing didn't know that at the time. WIth the subject down and on the ground the threat was neutralized. Any shots fired after that just reflected the mean murderous spirit of the cop. His intent was to kill and not just to neutralize the threat. I guess he was not a pro-life cop.

 

[JQPublic1]

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...

Of course. Gun laws have no effect on criminals. They will get their gun with or without gun laws. The only thing that significantly changes the picture is gun laws that restrict gun carrying, thereby giving criminals free rein to go out and massacre crowds of people. How dumb can liberals be ? Sheeesh!!

Oh....they can be very dumb.....they are going to vote for hilary...in large numbers.......very dumb indeed....

Dumb? Voting like the Ashkenazi Jews, Asians and other brainy types doesn't make one dumb! I am not sure that Hillary will get their vote this time around but a Democrat likely will.

 

[JQPublic1]

Why are soo many negro's involved in criminal activity? ......

Abetter question would be: "why are the majority of "Negroes" NOT involved in criminal activity."

It would be if you believe that blacks are naturally inclined to criminal behavior.

Isn't that what YOU believe? Why haven't you asked that question?

Why do you think the question as to why more blacks weren't involved in criminal activity should be asked? The question is what you believe, and to pose a question like that obviously means you believe they are.

The question was not posited as a subset of my personal beliefs. It was posited as a subset of beliefs demonstrated repeatedly by YOU and others who continually indict the entire Black community for the deeds of a few by pointing at proportional statistics ad nauseam . Don't try to cover your sophistry by twisting my narrative to make it appear that I think like YOU>

 

[JQPublic1]

Why are soo many negro's involved in criminal activity? ......

Abetter question would be: "why are the majority of "Negroes" NOT involved in criminal activity."

Huh?

Why the surprise? The news media thrives on so-called Black criminality and continuously projects the notion that Blacks are a race of criminals. You just verified that falsehood in your preceding statement. See how subtly you have been indoctrinated. The frightening thing is there are millions like you who are unaware that they have been brainwashed,

 

[jc456]

Why are soo many negro's involved in criminal activity? ......

Abetter question would be: "why are the majority of "Negroes" NOT involved in criminal activity."

Huh?

Why the surprise? The news media thrives on so-called Black criminality and continuously projects the notion that Blacks are a race of criminals. You just verified that falsehood in your preceding statement. See how subtly you have been indoctrinated. The frightening thing is there are millions like you who are unaware that they have been brainwashed,

Because it has no logic

 

[JQPublic1]

Why are soo many negro's involved in criminal activity? ......

Abetter question would be: "why are the majority of "Negroes" NOT involved in criminal activity."

Huh?

Why the surprise? The news media thrives on so-called Black criminality and continuously projects the notion that Blacks are a race of criminals. You just verified that falsehood in your preceding statement. See how subtly you have been indoctrinated. The frightening thing is there are millions like you who are unaware that they have been brainwashed,

Because it has no logic

The logic is there you just have to be smart enough to comprehend it...heh heh heh!

 

[jc456]

Why are soo many negro's involved in criminal activity? ......

Abetter question would be: "why are the majority of "Negroes" NOT involved in criminal activity."

Huh?

Why the surprise? The news media thrives on so-called Black criminality and continuously projects the notion that Blacks are a race of criminals. You just verified that falsehood in your preceding statement. See how subtly you have been indoctrinated. The frightening thing is there are millions like you who are unaware that they have been brainwashed,

Because it has no logic

The logic is there you just have to be smart enough to comprehend it...heh heh heh!

Oh please explain