On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 1:26:14 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
Stormin Mormon
Thu, 26 May 2016 12:32:27 GMT in
alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/26/2016 8:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member
take a child to the doctor. During the visit the family member
was asked if there were guns in the house. After confirming
that there were, the family member was asked if the ammo was
kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in
response to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in
this administration makes it their business. That's what happens
when the pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real
problem, not a proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I saw a web page a while back. Turns out that
pretty much all the school shooters were on
psych medicines, prescribed. So, it's very
possible the gun nuts are right (double entendre)
here.

Other item of note, the mass killings have all
been in gun free zones. So, the victims had no
way to shoot back. The loony left's answer?
make more gun free zones. Hello!


If you're a bad guy... wouldn't it make more sense to target a place
you can be reasonably certain doesn't have any realistic ability to
defend itself or it's people from you? You have gun(s), you're
reasonably certain they don't, because, it's a 'gun free zone'. Due
to the fact you're going to shoot people anyway, I suspect that
breaking the gun free zone law really isn't much concern to you at
this point.


Most of these shooters were either so fanatic or so deranged that their
chance of getting shot probably never entered into their decision of target.
Almost all of these, the shooter had a connection to the place, ie it was
a workplace, a school they were associated with, etc. You can't convince
me that one of these shooters goes on one of these rampages and they don't
realize that in the response, eg the police showing up, they have a good
chance of being shot. And that is exactly what happens with a lot of them.



We all know how this ends for the poor sobs stuck in the
building/outside nearby who have no realistic means in which to
defend themselves with.



We also see daily examples of road rage and other bad behavior. If we
encourage and allow most of the population to walk around with a gun,
it's not hard to see how you could wind up with more of those incidents
turning into shootings too. If you start handing out guns to everyone,
it's not just going to be the exec, the little old lady, etc that have
them. A lot are going to be people like you see at those Trump protests,
for example. Angry hot heads, full of bad judgment, who have no
felony convictions, so now they go around carrying a gun, looking for
trouble. Idiots like George Zimmerman, for example. I supported Z at the
time, and still think that based on the evidence, the acquittal was
justified. But I don't think Martin was the only bad actor that night
and now have plenty of reason to doubt Z's account of what started the
whole thing. We've now seen the real Z in all the other incidents the
skunk has had, the dumb things he's said and done, including the latest,
his auctioning off the gun. So, IDK how many other whackos there are out
there that shouldn't be walking around with guns, but I suspect it's a
lot.