Why, other than a major diversion, would you be interested in speculating on something you know nothing about when you have volumes of information regarding USA war crimes and terrorism to address?
What in the world is strange about wanting to see the USA stop slaughtering innocents?
What on earth is strange about wanting the USA to be what it was supposed to be?
Y'all are the strange ones. You make the Germans under Hitler look like saints.
0 Replies
ossobuco
2
Reply
Sat 15 Mar, 2014 07:33 pm
@JTT,
I figure you are now hitting your sixties and manage to live by hate, sort of like bird feeder plastics with seeds.
No one here is going to listen unless you break down and talk.
That's my gripe, the reaching for a weapon or a wallet thing.
Reach for something?
You added weapon?
Quote:
According to detectives, his 16-year-old daughter let McCormick in the house and snuck him into her bedroom.
Her younger brother went to say good night and saw two feet sticking out under the bed, detectives said. He then went to get his father.
The father walked in and asked questions, but his daughter claimed to not know McCormick. The father then called 911, but an argument ensued with the teenage boy.
The father told deputies that McCormick dropped his hands as if to grab something, so the man opened fire. The teen died at the scene
Pertinent facts above... Man finds stranger in daughters room, daughter claims she doesn't know him, stranger started arguing (We have no idea what was said or how badly the argument escalated) with father who had a gun in hand. Father already called 911 so cops on the way. Stranger reaches for [something] and gets shot as a result. Tense situation. Stranger (McCormick) should have just shut up and sat there til cops showed up and brought the tension down.
In that situation I would have assumed weapon, but I wasn't there and none of can really tell what was said or what it looked like McCormick was doing when he got shot.
In the end, I see no reason to associate this TEXANS and their GUNS. This could happen anywhere.
But - why shoot the (possible) jerk? He dropped his hands?
Can't people talk?
It's looking to me that Texas is a fear state, by the news, with bullets ready.
0 Replies
edgarblythe
1
Reply
Sat 15 Mar, 2014 10:01 pm
Texas deserves much of its reputation. Only thing is, there are other states almost identical, when it comes to societal crimes and misdemeanors. I would prefer to stay in Texas to moving to Florida and some other places I could name.
Pa has a "orta wannabe" Stand Yer Ground law. The only diff is that, in Pa you can only "stand yer ground" if the other guy is also packing and displaying threateningly.
That kind of law makes sense because it gives you two choices to either
1. duck for cover and save your loved ones and yourself
OR
2. you can play hero and hope that you're a quicker and better shot and your gun don't jam.
All these bogus laws like Fla don't require ANY responsibility of the parties to grow up and try to cool it down.
Farmer: Pa has a "orta wannabe" Stand Yer Ground law.
Pa ought not to be making such laws without consulting Ma.
0 Replies
ossobuco
1
Reply
Sat 15 Mar, 2014 10:30 pm
Re Texas, I dearly miss Tartarin. PDiddie will remember her name. Intelligent woman who also likes corgis. I figure they spatted. I do know her real name, but don't want to be invasive.
She is an excellent painter, sent me her slides at some point, me sending them back, trust, and mine to her. If I were clever or deceitful I'd have copied them, but I didn't.
She was de accessing, so maybe she knew re the future.
In any case, I consider her one of a2k's excellent people.
0 Replies
raprap
2
Reply
Sun 16 Mar, 2014 12:08 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
and your gun don't jam.
I prefer a revolver to a semi-auto just for this reason.
To some extent I agree wholeheartedly. I reside in a state with a state of a population of bout 11E6. The state announced in January they've issued 1E6 carry permits. There is an accidental shooting, a loaded gun found in a public place, a dumb 'Texan with a gun' or a kid with their 'fathers' gun daily.
When I checked the local news ledes of twenty and forty years ago it did happen, but nowhere near as much as it does today.
0
Two asides--One must remember that NRA stands for National Rifle Association, not the National Handgun Association--Are they being true to themselves? Has the NRA become an Oxymoron?
Second, wisdom of Johnny Cash.
Rap
0 Replies
oralloy
-2
Reply
Sun 16 Mar, 2014 12:10 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
One shot....I think there was an intent to kill. I said the same about the Zimmerman/Martin affair, there should be a higher standard of threat to legally kill someone than there is to shoot and wound someone. This gun culture message "if you are going to take the shot then shoot to kill" is barbaric and bizarre.
Your views of gunfights are unrealistic. All that can reasonably be done is aiming for the center of mass. There is no such thing as "shooting to wound".
0 Replies
oralloy
-1
Reply
Sun 16 Mar, 2014 12:11 am
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:
Nah, there are others I don't want to see ******* up threads.
About the only thing you do in any thread is spew ignorant gibberish.
And except for the odd occasion when I take a moment to address posts like this, about the only thing I do in any thread is provide pertinent and timely facts.
I don't begrudge the right of you low-IQ types to put me on ignore so you can avoid having to read facts that I am sure you find confusing and discomforting, but let's not go falsely accusing me of your detrimental impact on a conversation.
REGARDLESS of the answer to that question:
I assure u with the utmost of unlimited candor
that I will do EVERYTHING I CAN to defeat gun control.
I am the Gun Lobby.
David
0 Replies
wmwcjr
1
Reply
Sun 16 Mar, 2014 01:17 pm
@ossobuco,
osso wrote:
Re: JTT (Post 5608311)
They're ok.
Well, actually, for your information, one of them passed away decades ago. I don't remember her name, and I don't know the cause of her death. Needless to say, it wasn't Diana.
osso wrote:
Wonder what they would have thought about the other supremes.
Unless they're female equivalents of Uncle Toms such as Clarence Thomas (which I seriously doubt) and assuming they paid attention to the news last year, I'm sure they don't think very highly of the Republican SCOTUS majority, who eviscerated the Voting Rights Act (as if they want a return to Plessy vs. Ferguson, which wouldn't surprise me). (My! What a badly written awkward sentence that is! Oh, well. Who cares! )
. . . except for the odd occasion when I take a moment to address posts like this, about the only thing I do in any thread is provide pertinent and timely facts.
)
(Please take no offense. 
)
