33
   

The Gun Fight in Washington. Your opinons?

 
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 07:07 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Background checks r unConstitutional discrimination
as to WHO can defend his life n who is not good enuf for that.



David

So you think criminals should be able to buy guns in gun stores whenever they want. That almost seems reasonable in bizarro world.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 08:08 am
13-Year-Old Florida Boy Shoots 6-Year-Old Sister In Chest

Quote:
"Her shirt was bloody, and you could see through a piece of gauze that she had a hole in her chest above the heart," said Latourrette, who has two young daughters. "Her eyes were wide open in a blank stare, like she was in shock. I'll never forget that look."

According to the Children's Defense Fund, one-third of all households with children younger than 18 have a gun, and more than 40 percent of gun-owning households with children store their guns unlocked.

The fund also reported that 22 percent of children with gun-owning parents handled guns in their homes without their parents' knowledge.

Guns and accidental shootings involving children were in the national news last week when a 5-year-old Kentucky boy shot and killed his 2-year-old sister with a special, child-sized rifle he got in November for his birthday.

H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 08:40 am
@revelette,


The parents are at fault here... maybe mandatory background
checks are needed in order for people to become parents...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 08:42 am
@parados,
These gun lovers have myopia; they can't think about all those violence with guns in the home. They want to "protect themselves" from the bad guys, but more family members get killed by their own guns over protection.

I'd like to see some stats on a) how many really protect themselves vs b) how many kill themselves or their family members.

They are hopeless.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 08:48 am
@revelette,
Quote:
The fund also reported that 22 percent of children with gun-owning parents handled guns in their homes without their parents' knowledge.


Strange is it not with many tens of millions of homes with firearms in them and that 22 percents of children are claimed repeat claimed to be playing with them and yet such shootings are very very rare.

Off hand my guess would be that children playing with matches cause more harm then all those guns in all the households but the anti-gun crowd do not care about overall home safety or children safety but just care about finding emotional reasons to ban guns.

Quote:
http://www.ehow.com/about_4614875_statistics-house-fires.html

Thousands of people die every year in house fires. Furthermore, tens of thousands of people are injured. Fires are caused by a large variety of things, including children playing with matches and smoking. Because the risk to life, limb and property is so huge, the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) holds a fire prevention week every year. The agency also spends a tremendous amount of effort trying to help people learn about and practice fire safety. Does this Spark an idea?
Other People Are Reading

Read more: Statistics on House Fires | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_4614875_statistics-house-fires.html#ixzz2SWXPRTjx
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 08:48 am

These idiots (cice imp) are part of the problem.

They want everyone (except themselves) to be totally dependent on big liberal
government for all of their needs, they hate the individual and individual rights.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 08:59 am
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
They want everyone (except themselves) to be totally dependent on big liberal
government for all of their needs, they hate the individual and individual rights.


An yet we can all wake up one morning and find that all the public safety elements of governments along with the phone system to call them for that matter is not working and will not be working for months as I found out in 1992 after Hurricane Andrew came to visit my area of the country.

The courts had also rule that the police have no duty to come and rescue you if you do happen to find yourself in trouble in a middle of a riot area for example. Being in the wrong place and at the wrong time without a means of defensing yourself can mean your life as the police watch a few blocks away behind Barricades.
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 02:03 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
They want everyone (except themselves) to be totally dependent on big liberal
government for all of their needs, they hate the individual and individual rights.


An yet we can all wake up one morning and find that all the public safety elements of governments along with the phone system to call them for that matter is not working and will not be working for months as I found out in 1992 after Hurricane Andrew came to visit my area of the country.

The courts had also rule that the police have no duty to come and rescue you if you do happen to find yourself in trouble in a middle of a riot area for example. Being in the wrong place and at the wrong time without a means of defensing yourself can mean your life as the police watch a few blocks away behind Barricades.
Yes, as Reginald Denny found out in California,
when the whole nation watched him get stomped, for the best part of an hour.
He has never recovered from his injuries, but he obayed ALL gun control laws.
He now pays the penalty for that obedience.

It's better to be tried by 12 men than carried by 6.





So saith David
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 02:12 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Talking about what happened in "1992" after a storm is irrelevant to this discussion. So are stories about kids playing with matches.

The subject here is "GUNS."
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 02:27 pm
@cicerone imposter,


What an idiot you are, cice imp. A ******* idiot.

RD could have defended himself and others if he had a GUN.
Others could have defended themselves and RD if they had GUNS.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 02:31 pm
@H2O MAN,
"If he had a gun?" Who's the ******* idiot here?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 02:52 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



What an idiot you are, cice imp. A ******* idiot.

RD could have defended himself and others if he had a GUN.
Others could have defended themselves and RD if they had GUNS.
Yes. That was my point.
C. I. was mentally unable to discern that.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  4  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:07 pm
@parados,
That is what equal protection of the laws MEANS.
Every citizen has an EQUAL RIGHT to defend his life. U shud be able to understand that.

The equal right to defend your life is a lot more important
than the equal right to seating on a bus, for a few minutes,
even qua the same bus passenger, if she is later put in peril of life or limb, by man or beast. Disagree ?

We know damn well that criminals WILL arm themselves
regardless of the state of the law or the law of the State,
the same as thay access n possess marijuana or heroin.
(Maybe u think that robbers or murderers will begin obaying gun control laws??
To u, that is "reasonable" ?)
BillRM
 
  4  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:08 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Talking about what happened in "1992" after a storm is irrelevant to this discussion. So are stories about kids playing with matches.

The subject here is "GUNS."


Sorry large storms and other such events hit somewhere in the US every few years with the same or at least similar effects to the 1992 Hurricane Andrew where it is a damn good idea to have weapons along with other tools/supplies for when you can not dial 911 and get the public safety at your doorstep within minutes.

So my example is hardly irrelevant to say the least in that regard next comparing how dangerous having firearms in a home compare to such things as a book of matches is also not irrelevant .

Firearms does not stand out as too dangerous to have in a home even if that what you had been trying to sell.
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:20 pm
@BillRM,
Firearms r necessary life-saving emergency equipment.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:25 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Yes, as Reginald Denny found out in California,
when the whole nation watched him get stomped, for the best part of an hour.
He has never recovered from his injuries, but he obayed ALL gun control laws.
He now pays the penalty for that obedience.


Yes and in the end it was black citizens who came to his aid and got him to medical care as the police seems more then willing to watch him bleed out on national TV.

Sometimes it is your fellow citizens who will step up and save your life not the public safety people that some on this website wish us to completely depend on.

The police in fact, by court rulings, have no duty to come and save your ass.

In the case of the Texas tower sniper it was citizens that provide counter fire to keep the sniper from having a free range in killing more people and it was an armed citizen as well as an armed police officer that climb that tower to deal with the problem.
H2O MAN
 
  4  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:40 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:



The police in fact, by court rulings, have no duty to come and save your ass.



True, but the dumbmasses are ignorant to this fact.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:44 pm
@BillRM,
Surviving even the first few seconds of the stomping was pure chance.

He coud have used his TRUCK as a weapon to ram his way to safety,
but his choice was less forceful. He each day pays the price of his pacifism; very sad.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:51 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
He coud have used his TRUCK as a weapon to ram his way to safety,


Yes if a mob had been trying break into and drag me out of a car or a truck in a similar situation I would had have no moral problem with putting the vehicle in gear.

It was surely deadly force time.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 May, 2013 03:53 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Surviving even the first few seconds of the stomping was pure chance.

He coud have used his TRUCK as a weapon to ram his way to safety,
but his choice was less forceful. He each day pays the price of his pacifism; very sad.


Why did he stop? ... I would have turned the savages into speed bumps during my escape, any that attempted to stop me that is.

Never stop and for God's sake, never get out of the vehicle if it's still drive-able, they make excellent weapons
against soft targets and the semi RD was driving would have been virtually unstoppable in this particular instance.

Why on earth did he stop?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 05:17:13