Restuarant has "No Guns Allowed" Sign...gun owners don't bring guns...the robber did though...

[Brain357]

You won't answer the question, that is proof enough. You are being dishonest, that is why you can't answer the question.

I told you criminals don't even notice the sign. You are being dishonest with your claim. Nothing backs it.

So if you were a criminal and you saw a no guns allowed sign or no sign, you'd take the one without the sigh. Got it, you are a liar.

If I saw a "guns allowed" sign, I would use my second amendment rights to get bigger guns

The question was if you were a robber and you saw a restaurant with a "no guns allowed" sign and no sign at all, which would you rob? Brain seems to think there is no difference and he would rob the one with no sign at all.

Brain will claim he's try to rob a police station if it meant he would not have to admit he was wrong.
He lies. It's all he can do.

Point out a single lie.

 

[Brain357]

You have zero proof it effects criminals in any way.

You won't answer the question, that is proof enough. You are being dishonest, that is why you can't answer the question.

I told you criminals don't even notice the sign. You are being dishonest with your claim. Nothing backs it.

So if you were a criminal and you saw a no guns allowed sign or no sign, you'd take the one without the sigh. Got it, you are a liar.

No I said I don't think they even notice the sign. The sign does not guarantee a successful crime. And with only 230 criminals shot and killed in defense each year I don't think they care. You have provided nothing to support your claim.

So you refuse to answer the original question? You skirt around answering without answering. I am thinking you would be the moron that would rob the one without the sign because you lack any common sense.

I've answered you several times, the criminal wouldn't notice the sign. Now post your support for your claim. I've been waiting.

 

[rightwinger]

You have zero proof it effects criminals in any way.

You won't answer the question, that is proof enough. You are being dishonest, that is why you can't answer the question.

I told you criminals don't even notice the sign. You are being dishonest with your claim. Nothing backs it.

So if you were a criminal and you saw a no guns allowed sign or no sign, you'd take the one without the sigh. Got it, you are a liar.

If I saw a "guns allowed" sign, I would use my second amendment rights to get bigger guns

The question was if you were a robber and you saw a restaurant with a "no guns allowed" sign and no sign at all, which would you rob? Brain seems to think there is no difference and he would rob the one with no sign at all.

I told you

I would use my second amendment rights to get more powerful weapons

Thank GOD for the NRA...defending the rights of criminals everywhere

 

[westwall]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

Yeah, you're a troll. When presented with the evidence that you did indeed make the statement you try and squirm out of what you said. Typical troll.

 

[Brain357]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

Yeah, you're a troll. When presented with the evidence that you did indeed make the statement you try and squirm out of what you said. Typical troll.

That isn't at all the statement you claimed. You seem to be the troll.

 

[Papageorgio]

You won't answer the question, that is proof enough. You are being dishonest, that is why you can't answer the question.

I told you criminals don't even notice the sign. You are being dishonest with your claim. Nothing backs it.

So if you were a criminal and you saw a no guns allowed sign or no sign, you'd take the one without the sigh. Got it, you are a liar.

No I said I don't think they even notice the sign. The sign does not guarantee a successful crime. And with only 230 criminals shot and killed in defense each year I don't think they care. You have provided nothing to support your claim.

So you refuse to answer the original question? You skirt around answering without answering. I am thinking you would be the moron that would rob the one without the sign because you lack any common sense.

I've answered you several times, the criminal wouldn't notice the sign. Now post your support for your claim. I've been waiting.

You are answering as a third person, the question wasn't in third person, you know damn good and well that you are avoiding the question because as any smart person, you would go to the one with less risk. So stop your dishonesty.

 

[rightwinger]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

I don't understand the OP

Nobody was killed but he is not satisfied unless there is a shootout

 

[Brain357]

I told you criminals don't even notice the sign. You are being dishonest with your claim. Nothing backs it.

So if you were a criminal and you saw a no guns allowed sign or no sign, you'd take the one without the sigh. Got it, you are a liar.

No I said I don't think they even notice the sign. The sign does not guarantee a successful crime. And with only 230 criminals shot and killed in defense each year I don't think they care. You have provided nothing to support your claim.

So you refuse to answer the original question? You skirt around answering without answering. I am thinking you would be the moron that would rob the one without the sign because you lack any common sense.

I've answered you several times, the criminal wouldn't notice the sign. Now post your support for your claim. I've been waiting.

You are answering as a third person, the question wasn't in third person, you know damn good and well that you are avoiding the question because as any smart person, you would go to the one with less risk. So stop your dishonesty.

Less risk for what? Does the sign guarantee no guns and a successful crime? It does neither. The sign is not a factor. And you clearly have no support for that claim.

 

[Brain357]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

I don't understand the OP

Nobody was killed but he is not satisfied unless there is a shootout

He thinks people are only safe with a gun. When he sees people are safe without guns he gets mad. He is only interested in selling more guns.

 

[Papageorgio]

So if you were a criminal and you saw a no guns allowed sign or no sign, you'd take the one without the sigh. Got it, you are a liar.

No I said I don't think they even notice the sign. The sign does not guarantee a successful crime. And with only 230 criminals shot and killed in defense each year I don't think they care. You have provided nothing to support your claim.

So you refuse to answer the original question? You skirt around answering without answering. I am thinking you would be the moron that would rob the one without the sign because you lack any common sense.

I've answered you several times, the criminal wouldn't notice the sign. Now post your support for your claim. I've been waiting.

You are answering as a third person, the question wasn't in third person, you know damn good and well that you are avoiding the question because as any smart person, you would go to the one with less risk. So stop your dishonesty.

Less risk for what? Does the sign guarantee no guns and a successful crime? It does neither. The sign is not a factor. And you clearly have no support for that claim.

I have claimed a thing, I asked you a point black question and you are to dishonest to answer it straight up.

Again, which would you rob the one with the no guns sign or the one with no sign? Pretty easy unless you are dishonest, then you will continue to dance.

 

[2aguy]

Police receive constant training on how to use their weapon and how to react in hostile situations.
All one has to do is see the recent cases of cops overreacting in confrontations and killing people unnecessarily

But here we have the NRA drones spitting out thread after thread about how much better our lives would be if we only had more guns. Can you imagine what will happen when you have poorly trained (most likely untrained) employees and customers firing in a crowded restaurant?

Police do not receive constant training...please, try to keep up....most police touch their guns when they put them on and take them off for work and qualify once a year....on the honor system.......

And there have been stores for years that have people with guns and you don't see the massive casualties you guys claim


You anti gunners.......accidental gun deaths have gone down.....not up.....repeat....accidental gun deaths have gone down not up as more people have been buying and carrying guns ...so your whole imaginary world is a lie...............shown by actual real world statistics from the FBI and the CDC........

You are wrong......

We know.....and gun nuts go to the range and pretend to shoot bad guys

That makes them more qualified than police in making life or death decisions

No, but you don't give enough credit to regular people....who often times respond to horrible situations with calm and competence....

I know...it is a yin and yang thing with you guys......you say you care about the little people, more than we do, the yin........the yang....you think regular people are emotionally out of control and will turn into raging maniacs the first time the government isn't in charge of their every action...

 

[Brain357]

No I said I don't think they even notice the sign. The sign does not guarantee a successful crime. And with only 230 criminals shot and killed in defense each year I don't think they care. You have provided nothing to support your claim.

So you refuse to answer the original question? You skirt around answering without answering. I am thinking you would be the moron that would rob the one without the sign because you lack any common sense.

I've answered you several times, the criminal wouldn't notice the sign. Now post your support for your claim. I've been waiting.

You are answering as a third person, the question wasn't in third person, you know damn good and well that you are avoiding the question because as any smart person, you would go to the one with less risk. So stop your dishonesty.

Less risk for what? Does the sign guarantee no guns and a successful crime? It does neither. The sign is not a factor. And you clearly have no support for that claim.

I have claimed a thing, I asked you a point black question and you are to dishonest to answer it straight up.

Again, which would you rob the one with the no guns sign or the one with no sign? Pretty easy unless you are dishonest, then you will continue to dance.

No I have answered several times.

 

[2aguy]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

I don't understand the OP

Nobody was killed but he is not satisfied unless there is a shootout

He thinks people are only safe with a gun. When he sees people are safe without guns he gets mad. He is only interested in selling more guns.

No....I stated truthfully that Sandra Bullock was extremely lucky......and that is all she had on her side....she saw the guy before he saw her and she managed to get to the safe room before he caught her...which allowed her to call the police.....at any point if she had had bad luck.....she would be the latest celebrity murder on TMZ....

 

[2aguy]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

I don't understand the OP

Nobody was killed but he is not satisfied unless there is a shootout

He thinks people are only safe with a gun. When he sees people are safe without guns he gets mad. He is only interested in selling more guns.

Actually, I think people, for the most part, are safer...with a gun.....than not.......

 

[rightwinger]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

I don't understand the OP

Nobody was killed but he is not satisfied unless there is a shootout

He thinks people are only safe with a gun. When he sees people are safe without guns he gets mad. He is only interested in selling more guns.

He just won't accept....give them the freaking money and send them on their way

Cameras stop more crime than our 300 million guns

 

[Brain357]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

I don't understand the OP

Nobody was killed but he is not satisfied unless there is a shootout

He thinks people are only safe with a gun. When he sees people are safe without guns he gets mad. He is only interested in selling more guns.

No....I stated truthfully that Sandra Bullock was extremely lucky......and that is all she had on her side....she saw the guy before he saw her and she managed to get to the safe room before he caught her...which allowed her to call the police.....at any point if she had had bad luck.....she would be the latest celebrity murder on TMZ....

If she had a gun and had bad luck she might have shot herself on accident. Fact is she had no gun and is fine. You seem to have the wrong thread btw.

 

[2aguy]

Police receive constant training on how to use their weapon and how to react in hostile situations.
All one has to do is see the recent cases of cops overreacting in confrontations and killing people unnecessarily

But here we have the NRA drones spitting out thread after thread about how much better our lives would be if we only had more guns. Can you imagine what will happen when you have poorly trained (most likely untrained) employees and customers firing in a crowded restaurant?

We already have more guns per capita by far, yet high homicide and crimes rates compared to other countries. Clearly guns isn't the answer.

out of over 320 million people we only have 8-9,000 gun murders a year and those are primarily isolated to major urban areas, and small mutlit block gang controlled areas.....

no we don't have a gun problem....

God...does everyone hate gun nuts as much as I do?

Trying to trivialize ten thousand murders a year as "well it could be alot worse"

Not only that but one side of his mouth says it's all thugs shooting each other and not a problem. The other side of his mouth says there are all these innocent people being shot so they need guns. Dishonest.

And you are an asshole brain......tolerated because you aren't as bat shit nuts as rightwinger and neddly......

I have clearly stated what the stats point to....most gun murders, the majority are done by members of gangs......and you know what asshole....gangs also rob stores and commit other robbery...

I have also stated that some robbers kill their victims after the robbery, to silence the witness.......

The two aren't mutually exclusive comments asshole......with all due respect.....

 

[M14 Shooter]

Police receive constant training on how to use their weapon and how to react in hostile situations.
All one has to do is see the recent cases of cops overreacting in confrontations and killing people unnecessarily

But here we have the NRA drones spitting out thread after thread about how much better our lives would be if we only had more guns. Can you imagine what will happen when you have poorly trained (most likely untrained) employees and customers firing in a crowded restaurant?

We already have more guns per capita by far, yet high homicide and crimes rates compared to other countries. Clearly guns isn't the answer.

out of over 320 million people we only have 8-9,000 gun murders a year and those are primarily isolated to major urban areas, and small mutlit block gang controlled areas.....

no we don't have a gun problem....

God...does everyone hate gun nuts as much as I do?

Trying to trivialize ten thousand murders a year as "well it could be alot worse"

Not only that but one side of his mouth says it's all thugs shooting each other and not a problem. The other side of his mouth says there are all these innocent people being shot so they need guns. Dishonest.

And you are an asshole brain......tolerated because you aren't as bat shit nuts as rightwinger and neddly......

But 200% more dishonest.

 

[Brain357]

The unarmed restaurant owner is alive. Gun shop owner dead. I'd rather be the restaurant owner.

This post? I think most people would rather be the guy that is alive.

I don't understand the OP

Nobody was killed but he is not satisfied unless there is a shootout

He thinks people are only safe with a gun. When he sees people are safe without guns he gets mad. He is only interested in selling more guns.

Actually, I think people, for the most part, are safer...with a gun.....than not.......

17000 accidental shootings each year. Only 9000 intentional homicides most being thugs. I think most people are safer without.

 

[rightwinger]

Police receive constant training on how to use their weapon and how to react in hostile situations.
All one has to do is see the recent cases of cops overreacting in confrontations and killing people unnecessarily

But here we have the NRA drones spitting out thread after thread about how much better our lives would be if we only had more guns. Can you imagine what will happen when you have poorly trained (most likely untrained) employees and customers firing in a crowded restaurant?

We already have more guns per capita by far, yet high homicide and crimes rates compared to other countries. Clearly guns isn't the answer.

out of over 320 million people we only have 8-9,000 gun murders a year and those are primarily isolated to major urban areas, and small mutlit block gang controlled areas.....

no we don't have a gun problem....

God...does everyone hate gun nuts as much as I do?

Trying to trivialize ten thousand murders a year as "well it could be alot worse"

Not only that but one side of his mouth says it's all thugs shooting each other and not a problem. The other side of his mouth says there are all these innocent people being shot so they need guns. Dishonest.

And you are an asshole brain......tolerated because you aren't as bat shit nuts as rightwinger and neddly......

I have clearly stated what the stats point to....most gun murders, the majority are done by members of gangs......and you know what asshole....gangs also rob stores and commit other robbery...

I have also stated that some robbers kill their victims after the robbery, to silence the witness.......

The two aren't mutually exclusive comments asshole......with all due respect.....

Most murders are by someone you know

Why don't you tell us again how insignificant domestic homicides are?