Best 7 Minutes on the 2nd Amendment
Posted by Rand (-27) one month ago
What a great speech Rik

permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+2
-3
Posted by Bob Netherton III (+1481) one month ago
Nobody needs to fix that for him.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+4
moderator
founder
Posted by David Schott (+11192) one month ago
Reply to Bob Netherton III (#373417)
I think the message was something like, "Insanity is innate to humans; therefore, humans should be armed with fully automatic assault rifles." :smh:
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+3
Posted by Rand (-27) 26 days ago
Of course a liberal would misinterpreted that video.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1
-4
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1455) 26 days ago
Misinterpreting that video? Hmm. Let's see.

I wonder if the 59 innocent people shot and killed on October 1, 2017, in Las Vegas, Nevada, and the hundreds injured there would misinterpret the video?

Oh, and I wonder how many of the 32 people shot and killed in mass shooting events since the Las Vegas shootings would interpret the video?

Oh, I forgot, dead people can't speak up about this issue. However, I bet those who are recovering from gunshot wounds will have an opinion about that video. Maybe they will "misinterpret" the video as well.

Oh yes, and stay tuned, it's only October 25th. I wonder how many more people will die this month or be injured by gun shot wounds?

Oh, and by the way, Happy Halloween! It's spooky out there! I also wonder if children should wear bullet proof vests under their costumes this year.

Source:

https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+4
Posted by Rand (-27) 26 days ago
So taking guns away from good innocent citizens is going to keep guns away from criminals? They'll get guns wither way, so we might as well allow good people to protect ourselves. Do you that the shooter in Vegas was stopped by reasoning with him? Do you think people found him and said "Hey you need to stop this, this is bad" NO! A gun was used to stop the shooting. If guns were taken away, more inno cent people will be murdered. Criminals will have guns and innocent people won't have guns to protect themselvs and their loved ones. It's a fairy tale for people to think that onces guns are taken away, there will be no more shootings. A criminal isnt going to look at his gun and say " I can't use this to kill someone, it's against the law". He's going to use it on unarmed innocent people that had no choice cause a liberal communist government took their guns away, the only thing that was going to protect them
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1
-4
moderator
founder
Posted by David Schott (+11192) 26 days ago
Reply to Rand (#373507)
Did I miss the part where armed citizens kept the Las Vegas Mandalay Bay shooter from killing 58 people and wounding another 489?
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+4
supporter
Posted by Jeri Dalbec (+1947) 26 days ago
We have to remember that those not in favor of everyone and anyone carrying have the option to shop from home. Things have gotten so much better in that vein thus avoiding any chance of rape in a Parking Lot and needing to kill someone. Or someone with mental issues losing it. Trying not to think of myself but after 81 years I doubt that I would be much of a good shot..just a better target.

We have always had guns but only from the Law Enforcement aspect and there it was only used once or twice in 37 years but, not to kill anyone. I guess my thought is that there is probably not a real need for the item they use that allows perpetual firing that takes out so many people at once. Probably a good idea to ban that?

An upside would be possibly providing more prison traffic which would perpetuate free labor and thus be profitable. It does seem like despite all the rights to use firearms, you can get in big trouble even when protecting yourself.

I am just reflecting but I do see a lot of concern for public events.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+2
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-98) 26 days ago
The point is "Gun Free Zones" are violent zones. MCD needs a brain examination. I'd rather pay the litigation of carrying a concealed weapon and using it to protect myself, family and innocent bystanders rather than just hiding under dead bodies.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1
-3
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+1455) 26 days ago
I'm curious to know how TMFSP would have protected himself or his family (or anybody else) with his gun (concealed carry or not) had he been part of the crowd in Las Vegas being shot at from above (the 32nd Floor), at night, by a shooter in a building who was armed with what had effectively become a machine gun due to his having added the bump stock device? Please explain.

And, by the way, did I mention anything in my post about banning guns? Answer: No!

However, I am in favor of the federal law that prohibits the possession of machine guns unless they were lawfully possessed and registered before May 19, 1986. (18 U.S.C. 922(o).

Read more at:

https://www.cga.ct.gov/20...R-0020.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/...eapons_Ban
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+3
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-98) 26 days ago
This post was removed 26 days ago.
It was removed for being off-topic.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
-1