a fathers response to SHES

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    How will the govt regulating guns, ammo etc have an impact??

     


    How will schol prayer have an impact?

     

    Do you, like Huckabee, believe the evil belief that God had 20 children killed to punish the school system for not instituting school prayer?

    [/QUOTE]

    Huckabee never said that.  I listened to the clip.  You are a merchant of hate.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    tvoter knows everything.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I know it probably seems that way to you but, its really just common sense. ;-)

    [/QUOTE]

    Don't expect the left to understand common sense.  If they did, they wouldn't support the issues that they do.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    [QUOTE]

    If the Ban on Assault Rifles had not been lifted, the shooter's mother would have never had one.  Would the shooter still have gone to the school to kill little kids?  Yes.  But he wouldn't have killed as many.

    The day before the massacre in CT, a guy in China attacked 22 kids.  But the guy in China did it with a knife and I don't believe any of them died.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are an idiot.  You could care less about those kids.  you are really low.  crawl back under your fascist rock.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sorry it is you that does not care about the kids.  You have no solutions to stop future tragedies like this except perhaps to have MORE of these weapons in society.  That means there will be more kids dead.  Removing some extremely dangerous weapons from society is not fascism.  It's just common sense.  And you have none of that either. No heart, no brain that is you.

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't offer any solutions, don't claim to have any.  However, you don't have solutions either.  I venture to say stopping this type of tragedy takes more than just emotionial outbursts from the left that guns are bad.

    Your problem is that you have no sense of the root of the problem, and attack the symptom, not the problem.  This is the typical liberal response.  Completely blind to the killer, completely focused on it's agenda, use the tragedy for it's own political ends.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't expect the left to understand common sense.  If they did, they wouldn't support the issues that they do.

    [/QUOTE]

    A guy who guides his life based on mythology and unflinching ideology should not comment on the lack of common sense of others.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are an idiot.  You could care less about those kids.  you are really low.  crawl back under your fascist rock.

    [/QUOTE]

    Sorry it is you that does not care about the kids.  You have no solutions to stop future tragedies like this except perhaps to have MORE of these weapons in society.  That means there will be more kids dead.  Removing some extremely dangerous weapons from society is not fascism.  It's just common sense.  And you have none of that either. No heart, no brain that is you.

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't offer any solutions, don't claim to have any.  However, you don't have solutions either.  I venture to say stopping this type of tragedy takes more than just emotionial outbursts from the left that guns are bad.

    Your problem is that you have no sense of the root of the problem, and attack the symptom, not the problem.  This is the typical liberal response.  Completely blind to the killer, completely focused on it's agenda, use the tragedy for it's own political ends.

    [/QUOTE]

    No answers?  Glad you admitted it. Then get out of the way of people who have potential answers. 

    The root of the problem is that there are disturbed people in our society.  That is true with all societies.  But only we have the disturbing gun violence coming from these folks. Only we embrace gun culture like we do.  It makes logical sense that to curb these attacks we should look at guns and gun culture.  But logic is not your forte...  Passivity apparently is.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If the Ban on Assault Rifles had not been lifted, the shooter's mother would have never had one.  Would the shooter still have gone to the school to kill little kids?  Yes.  But he wouldn't have killed as many.

    The day before the massacre in CT, a guy in China attacked 22 kids.  But the guy in China did it with a knife and I don't believe any of them died.

    [/QUOTE]

    There's a vast array of weapons between a knife and an assault rifle!

    He absolutely could have went in with a 12 ga shotgun and 00 buckshot and did more damage due the closed/close environment and the wide pattern of buckshot (ball bearings) !!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:

    Sorry it is you that does not care about the kids.  You have no solutions to stop future tragedies like this except perhaps to have MORE of these weapons in society. 

    [QUOTE]

    talking about the weapon used is in no way working towards a solution to people killing people in mass!!

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If the Ban on Assault Rifles had not been lifted, the shooter's mother would have never had one.  Would the shooter still have gone to the school to kill little kids?  Yes.  But he wouldn't have killed as many.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You don't know that. You couldn't possibly know that. Of the mass shooting in the US that involved assault weapons, thankfully only 3 had double digit deaths. The most coming from this recent tragedy. Those mass shootings where non-assault weapons were used 6 incurred double digit deaths. Virginia Tech massacre resulted in the most deaths at 33....all from 9mm and .22 handguns.

    Again, I'm all for banning assault weapons but lets not kid ourselves by trying to think there will be less deaths because these are banned. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I work in a school.  I would like to have as much chance as possible to survive an attack.  I figure less bullets more chance. Every little bit helps.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:

    Sorry it is you that does not care about the kids.  You have no solutions to stop future tragedies like this except perhaps to have MORE of these weapons in society. 

    [QUOTE]

    talking about the weapon used is in no way working towards a solution to people killing people in mass!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is.  We ban machine guns for just this reason.  They have no useful civilian purpose: their inherent destructiveness outweighs any benefit they may have otherwise.  Same with these weapons.  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:

    Sorry it is you that does not care about the kids.  You have no solutions to stop future tragedies like this except perhaps to have MORE of these weapons in society. 

    [QUOTE]

    talking about the weapon used is in no way working towards a solution to people killing people in mass!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is.  We ban machine guns for just this reason.  They have no useful civilian purpose: their inherent destructiveness outweighs any benefit they may have otherwise.  Same with these weapons.  

    [/QUOTE]

    So ban things YOU think have no purpose. Sculptures have no purpose but, are appreciated for their beauty; guns are viewed in some way by many!

    A blunt object or small sculpture (thousands of people killed by blunt objects every year) cannot kill anyone unless some one picks it up and bashes people over the head with it. That doesnt make the death the sculptures fault!

    It's the same with guns!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    You don't know that. You couldn't possibly know that. 

    Oh come on. You make that move regularly and you know it isn't a fair play.


    I don't think he was claiming to see the future.

    At close range, an AR-15 does way more damage than a handgun, at least from all the autospy photos I've had to examine.

    If you disagree, is there any sort of weapon you'd be willing to admit are more likely to cause a higher body count than a handgun?

    [/QUOTE]

    A pump shotgun with buckshot would do more damage in that environment than a AR-15.

    Its not about the tool used for destruction!!

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    Its not about the tool used for destruction!!

    So you would be perfectly OK if civilians could purchase anything the military uses?

    Think carefully. If you say "no," it means you have admitted your position is bullsh!t. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Things that are "collectors items" and/or used as individual firearms. YES!!

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

     

    [QUOTE]

    talking about the weapon used is in no way working towards a solution to people killing people in mass!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Sure it is.  We ban machine guns for just this reason.  They have no useful civilian purpose: their inherent destructiveness outweighs any benefit they may have otherwise.  Same with these weapons.  

    [/QUOTE]


    So ban things YOU think have no purpose. Sculptures have no purpose but, are appreciated for their beauty; guns are viewed in some way by many!

    A blunt object or small sculpture (thousands of people killed by blunt objects every year) cannot kill anyone unless some one picks it up and bashes people over the head with it. That doesnt make the death the sculptures fault!

    It's the same with guns!

    [/QUOTE]

    You read what you want to read...  I said clearly that these kids of weapons have an INHERENT DESTRUCTIVENESS that outweighs any other benefit. Sculpture has no such threat within their concept.  These guns are designed to harm and kill people.  Blunt objects generally have a perfectly good utilitarian purpose.

    Are you purposely trying to be obtuse?  Teasing the liberal with silly analogies?  Or are you really this ideologically dimwitted?  

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    Its not about the tool used for destruction!!

    So you would be perfectly OK if civilians could purchase anything the military uses?

    Think carefully. If you say "no," it means you have admitted your position is bullsh!t. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Things that are "collectors items" and/or used as individual firearms. YES!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Complete and absolutely nutty response.  Everyone should be allowed to have a bazooka for their personal fun and protection.  You are an absurd little ideologue.  Just go away.  Your extremist views belong in a comic book, not real life.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    used as individual firearms. YES!!

    Why does a citizen need an RPG?

    [/QUOTE]

    An RPG is NOT an individualos firearm!

    fire·arm

    /ˈfaɪərˌɑrm/ Show Spelled [fahyuh r-ahrm] Show IPA

    noun a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

     

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    An RPG is NOT an individualos firearm! 


    But the 2nd amend. doesn't say 'firearms'. 

    [/QUOTE]

    The right to bear ARMS!!

    Do you think they mean a human appendage? lol

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: a fathers response to SHES

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    used as individual firearms. YES!!

    Why does a citizen need an RPG?

    [/QUOTE]

    An RPG is NOT an individualos firearm!

    fire·arm

    /ˈfaɪÉ™rËŒɑrm/ Show Spelled [fahyuh r-ahrm] Show IPA

    noun a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ok....a mortar. Happy? 

    Why does a civilian need a mortar?

    [/QUOTE]

    A mortar is an explosive device and in no way a firearm!

     

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share