More people saved by guns.

I'll try to explain it to you but you are a progressive anti-gun nut who probably won't listen. Robbery is essentially a feeling of entitlement. You feel you can just take what you want. You want it so you should have it.

Do you have any stats showing gun deaths resulting from robberies compared to all other types of gun deaths?

As far as your other point, again you focus only on the tool used. You don't care about the reasons people kill, mainly because it doesn't fit the narrative or further your agenda.

The claim in your title is that more people are saved by guns. However, statistics prove you wrong, especially for women.

Having a Gun in the House Doesn t Make a Woman Safer - The Atlantic


Now, I don't expect YOU to listen, much less agree, and this is not a thread for debate. I am posting examples of people who's lives and property are saved because someone had a gun. These are facts.

This is not a thread for debate? Wow, I was under the impression that this is a debate forum.

Wow! On top of all of your other shortcomings, you are illiterate too!

There are two or more meanings when someone uses the word "more". One would be " more" in comparison to something else, the other would be "more" as in additional. If I had used the word "more" in comparison, as you are implying, I would have said "more than (something). I meant "more" as in additional examples of lives and property saved by a person with a gun.

And as far as this thread, it's purpose is exactly what I (the OP) intended it to be. I did not intend for it to be a debate thread. Yes, it's a debate forum and I can't stop you from spouting you silliness here but do you know the difference between a thread and a forum? Probably not.

Your lack of education explains why you are both a liberal and an anti-gun lunatic.
 
Was stopped by two guys one had a knife out.. Pulled up my shirt showed pistol butt.. Walked on into store bought my Lotto Tickets and went home.. No problem.. Guess outcome if I did not have pistol..
 

And the best part....not a shot was fired......unlike what the anti gunners say about situations like this....and another thing to point out.....one man vs. 4 violent criminals and he was able to capture them...because he had a gun......how many other crimes have been stopped because he caught them and held them for police.....

Of course....since no shots were fired, and no one was killed....it won't be counted in the plus column for guns.....
 
OOp's Make that Left Wing Dismissive Order.... Right Wing Bee OK... ! ! ! '' Hell I don't know '' what's right...
 
One of the robbers was shot at while fleeing?
That doesn't seem right.

It's right. Let him go he can do it again. Probably save more lives.
I was taught otherwise. It may just be Illinois statute, but a fleeing perpetrator is hardly a threat.
 
I guess you saw those guys in France were running ,,, then they stopped as Cop was Backing up as fast as
he could... Bad guys got out and killed Cop as he was Running away... OK for Bad guys to kill Cops that are Fleeing... BUT ... NOT Ok for good guys to kill Bad guys that are Fleeing.. Right...? ? ?
 
One of the robbers was shot at while fleeing?
That doesn't seem right.

It's right. Let him go he can do it again. Probably save more lives.
I was taught otherwise. It may just be Illinois statute, but a fleeing perpetrator is hardly a threat.
You are from Illinois? Not surprising.
 
One of the robbers was shot at while fleeing?
That doesn't seem right.

It's right. Let him go he can do it again. Probably save more lives.
I was taught otherwise. It may just be Illinois statute, but a fleeing perpetrator is hardly a threat.
You are from Illinois? Not surprising.
Git some, Brotch. :slap:
 

Forum List

Back
Top