An opinion on gun control
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:48:26 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Arms and the Man" wrote in message
...
KR Williams ) wrote:

I think armed guards (professionals) will be better at protecting
the students.

Possible but an incredibly expensive solution.

I'm not saying that armed teachers can't protect students but I
see potential problems with this idea.

What problems? Teachers are citizens, too.

You are incapable of understanding human-factors, ergonomics and
probabilities.

Think of the thousands of hours, hundreds of thousands of hours per week
that teachers are in classrooms, interacting with students.


OK ?
And?
Think of the thousands and thousands of hours that armed police interact
with others, INCLUDING STUDENTS IN SCHOOLS


Now imagine that some fraction (some HIGH fraction according to the
wishes of some people) of those teachers bring guns into the classroom.
Now imagine what can happen because people are people and kids are kids.

Imagine what can happen when guns fall out of a holsters or waistbands.



LOL
What a buildup for such a little fart..

What makes you think that a person carrying for "thousands of hours" is just
going to tuck a gun into a waistband ?
Have you ever tried it ?
There is a REASON why holsters were invented
Which brings us to the second part of your nonsense
What do you think a hoster is ?
A folder napkin ?

Holsters are SPECIFICALLY designed to hold a gun tightly while carried.
Guns just don't pop out of a holster unless the wrong gun is in the wrong
holster


Imagine what can happen when guns are absent-mindedly left somewhere -
in a lunch room or washroom or a desk.


People who carry don't do so in their hands, dummy
Ergo they tend not to leave guns lying around of desks or "lunch rooms.
Their guns usually stay holsteres until needed..



Imagine what can happen when a gun is grabbed by a student.


You stick your elbow hard in his face, then turm him on your knee for a
spanking
Most good holsters these days are actually designed to prevent someone else
grabbing your gun out of it.



Imagine what can happen when a chalk-board eraser falls to the ground or
a delinquent in the playground fires a pellet gun or throws a rock at
the window and the teacher mistakes that for a gun-shot - and reaches
for their gun and fumbles and the gun is discharged.


If you have ever fired a shot, you will know the difference


Imagine what can happen when a teacher is stressed out and at the end of
their rope in a classroom full of noisy, bratty kids.


So you're saying that although nothing happens these days under those
circumstances, if they were armed they would pull out their guns and shoot
the kids ?
(Did you even bother thinking about this stupid **** BEFORE you posted
it ?)


I know that you, KR Williams, lives in an alternate universe where
nothing ever goes wrong, but think a moment about this universe and how
real people act and function.

Meanwhile you live in a alternate universe that is closer to Rod Serling's
Twilight Zone.



What a nice country to live in.

Everyone armed - and on edge.

Well thanks for that lovely demonstration of ignorance

I happen to be armed and quite serene..
But then I get to kick around idiots like you on usenet as a release
:-)

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with the
anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly ignorant
about guns. You'd think by now that at least you wouldn't hear about
AUTOMATIC ASSUALT rifle bans being needed but over and over again
these ignorant buffoons trot that out and incredibly the media doesn't
immediately correct their sorry asses.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:47:24 -0600, Doug
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:50:43 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:33:00 -0500, Arms and the Man
wrote:

KR Williams ) wrote:

I think armed guards (professionals) will be better at protecting
the students.

Possible but an incredibly expensive solution.

I'm not saying that armed teachers can't protect students but I
see potential problems with this idea.

What problems? Teachers are citizens, too.

You are incapable of understanding human-factors, ergonomics and
probabilities.

Think of the thousands of hours, hundreds of thousands of hours per week
that teachers are in classrooms, interacting with students.

Now imagine that some fraction (some HIGH fraction according to the
wishes of some people) of those teachers bring guns into the classroom.

Now imagine what can happen because people are people and kids are kids.

Imagine what can happen when guns fall out of a holsters or waistbands.

Imagine what can happen when guns are absent-mindedly left somewhere -
in a lunch room or washroom or a desk.

Imagine what can happen when a gun is grabbed by a student.

Imagine what can happen when a chalk-board eraser falls to the ground or
a delinquent in the playground fires a pellet gun or throws a rock at
the window and the teacher mistakes that for a gun-shot - and reaches
for their gun and fumbles and the gun is discharged.

Imagine what can happen when a teacher is stressed out and at the end of
their rope in a classroom full of noisy, bratty kids.

I know that you, KR Williams, lives in an alternate universe where
nothing ever goes wrong, but think a moment about this universe and how
real people act and function.

What a nice country to live in.

Everyone armed - and on edge.


Those are all the same tired old arguments the anti-gunners trot out
every time an effort was mounted to allow citizens the right to carry
weapons. Eventually many states allowed it anyway. And guess what..
NONE of those ridiculous "what ifs" happens. To hear you anti gunners
tell it, every person in the world is just a hairs width away from
going insane and killing everyone within a 50 mile radius. What you
need to realize is that every day you are out and about you
undoubtedly are within shooting distance of someone who's not a
criminal carrying a gun and guess what, nothing happens. You want to
disarm 350 million people because of the possibly of an average of
perhaps one person out of those 350 million people might go crazy and
start a mass shooting. It's completely irrational to think as you do.
You have far more chance of being struck by lightening yet I bet you
don't have lightening rods on your house and I bet you go out in the
rain anyway if you have a desire to.


I can't speak for a true "anti" gunner but speaking for myself, I just
want better limitations on the use of guns with grandfathered rights.
I don't feel people with guns have the rights to ANY guns in order to
protect themselves. Maybe we need to scrap all the gun laws and
start over ???

Maybe we should just follow what the second amendment says, ".. the
right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". And if you don't
like that try to get the second amendment changed. That's how things
are supposed to be done, not by just ignoring the clearly delineated
rights we have because some people don't want us to have those rights.

An opinion on gun control
 

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 00:21:07 -0500, Home Guy wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?


So are matches, gasoline, knives, etc. Do you want to collect all of
those too? On the flip side, lots of people are only alive today
because they had guns to protect themselves. Had they only been armed
with matches they would be dead. But apparently you'd like that.
America IS a violent country, in large part because of teh war on
drugs. There is NO reason to believe that disarming the honest
civilians would change that one bit. Most gun deaths and crime where
I'm living happens in a very focused part of town, the part of town
filled with minorities and the poor. There is no "general gun
problem" and nothing will be solved by disarming the honest citizens.

An opinion on gun control
 

On 12/25/2012 11:21 PM, Homo Gay wrote:
Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?


Automobiles and explosives are also used by crazy people to kill
innocents. Heck, some real nut jobs used passenger jets to kill
thousands of folks. Gee, perhaps there should be a ban on cars,
trucks, airplanes and fertilizer. The only problem with banning
fertilizer is there would be nothing for Leftists to spew when
they open their mouths. ^_^

TDD

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 6:45*am, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/25/2012 11:21 PM, Homo Gay wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

Automobiles and explosives are also used by crazy people to kill
innocents. Heck, some real nut jobs used passenger jets to kill
thousands of folks. Gee, perhaps there should be a ban on cars,
trucks, airplanes and fertilizer. The only problem with banning
fertilizer is there would be nothing for Leftists to spew when
they open their mouths. ^_^

TDD

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

An opinion on gun control
 

In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote:

were sane; if he is later found to be sane, he spends the remainder of the
time in prison.

Doug, I am not sure that's the precise outcome of the Kiritsis case, which
was a quite sensational event for journalists at the time because so much of
it was broadcast live complete with Tony's swearing.


Having talked with most of the main players over my years as a
PsychRn in Indy, I can state that there was, indeed, a cause-and-effect
relationship. FWlittleIW
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe

An opinion on gun control
 

On 12/26/2012 2:03 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 26, 6:45 am, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/25/2012 11:21 PM, Homo Gay wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

Automobiles and explosives are also used by crazy people to kill
innocents. Heck, some real nut jobs used passenger jets to kill
thousands of folks. Gee, perhaps there should be a ban on cars,
trucks, airplanes and fertilizer. The only problem with banning
fertilizer is there would be nothing for Leftists to spew when
they open their mouths. ^_^

TDD

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.


Cowardice of gun owners? Hum, no fertilizer shortage in The U.K. I see. ^_^

TDD

An opinion on gun control
 

harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?

In fact since at least 1950, EVERY mass shooting (4 or more killed) took
place in a "gun free" zone, with but one (probable) exception: The shooting
of Gabby Giffords and others in a Tuscon parking lot. Even there, a
concealed handgun licensee was quickly on the scene to help prevent
additional killings.

An opinion on gun control
 

On 12/26/2012 8:02 AM, HeyBub wrote:
harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?


Yep, in The Terminator movie. Our friend Harry believes Americans get
their education from Hollywood so I'm lead to believe he does the same. ^_^

TDD

An opinion on gun control
 

On 12/26/2012 12:21 AM, Home Guy wrote:
Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

I don't know the answer to this so I need your wisdom, Home Guy.

While I agree that gun deaths are tragic, statistics reveal even more
people are killed by distracted motorists that text/talk while driving.
Should we ban cell phones?

An opinion on gun control
 

Doug wrote:

Then you have NO CLUE as to the intent of the 2nd Amendment
The 2nd Amendment is ALL ABOUT citizens having the same arms as the
police and military


I disagree. I just researched the 2nd Amendment and no where does it
come close to saying this. It does NOT say you have the right to bear
ANY arms. You have the right to bear ARMS.

But you have not researched legal theory and construction. A fundamental
rule is that the general governs unless specifically over-ridden by the
specific. In as much as the 2nd Amendment does NOT say: "... arms shall not
be infringed, except for the AR-15 and TEC-9," the general form obtains.

Now understand that what the 2nd Amendment, indeed all the Amendments, says
is almost irrelevant. The only thing that counts is what it MEANS.

What the 2nd Amendment MEANS is: "...arms, any arms, all arms, big arms,
little arms, even arms with Chicken Pox, shall not be infringed."

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 08:14:12 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/26/2012 8:02 AM, HeyBub wrote:
harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?


Yep, in The Terminator movie. Our friend Harry believes Americans get
their education from Hollywood so I'm lead to believe he does the same. ^_^

Leftists always project their inadequacies on everyone else.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 21:23:57 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 06:47:24 -0600, Doug
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:50:43 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:33:00 -0500, Arms and the Man
wrote:

KR Williams ) wrote:

I think armed guards (professionals) will be better at protecting
the students.

Possible but an incredibly expensive solution.

I'm not saying that armed teachers can't protect students but I
see potential problems with this idea.

What problems? Teachers are citizens, too.

You are incapable of understanding human-factors, ergonomics and
probabilities.

Think of the thousands of hours, hundreds of thousands of hours per week
that teachers are in classrooms, interacting with students.

Now imagine that some fraction (some HIGH fraction according to the
wishes of some people) of those teachers bring guns into the classroom.

Now imagine what can happen because people are people and kids are kids.

Imagine what can happen when guns fall out of a holsters or waistbands.

Imagine what can happen when guns are absent-mindedly left somewhere -
in a lunch room or washroom or a desk.

Imagine what can happen when a gun is grabbed by a student.

Imagine what can happen when a chalk-board eraser falls to the ground or
a delinquent in the playground fires a pellet gun or throws a rock at
the window and the teacher mistakes that for a gun-shot - and reaches
for their gun and fumbles and the gun is discharged.

Imagine what can happen when a teacher is stressed out and at the end of
their rope in a classroom full of noisy, bratty kids.

I know that you, KR Williams, lives in an alternate universe where
nothing ever goes wrong, but think a moment about this universe and how
real people act and function.

What a nice country to live in.

Everyone armed - and on edge.


Those are all the same tired old arguments the anti-gunners trot out
every time an effort was mounted to allow citizens the right to carry
weapons. Eventually many states allowed it anyway. And guess what..
NONE of those ridiculous "what ifs" happens. To hear you anti gunners
tell it, every person in the world is just a hairs width away from
going insane and killing everyone within a 50 mile radius. What you
need to realize is that every day you are out and about you
undoubtedly are within shooting distance of someone who's not a
criminal carrying a gun and guess what, nothing happens. You want to
disarm 350 million people because of the possibly of an average of
perhaps one person out of those 350 million people might go crazy and
start a mass shooting. It's completely irrational to think as you do.
You have far more chance of being struck by lightening yet I bet you
don't have lightening rods on your house and I bet you go out in the
rain anyway if you have a desire to.


I can't speak for a true "anti" gunner but speaking for myself, I just
want better limitations on the use of guns with grandfathered rights.
I don't feel people with guns have the rights to ANY guns in order to
protect themselves. Maybe we need to scrap all the gun laws and
start over ???

Maybe we should just follow what the second amendment says, ".. the
right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". And if you don't
like that try to get the second amendment changed. That's how things
are supposed to be done, not by just ignoring the clearly delineated
rights we have because some people don't want us to have those rights.

Oh, but Douggie "researched" it and read up to "A well regulated
Militia". That was enough to convince him. Well, you really can't
expect him to read all 27 words, some of which are FOUR syllables.

An opinion on gun control
 

diy savant wrote:

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-
goers, and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

I don't know the answer to this so I need your wisdom, Home Guy.

While I agree that gun deaths are tragic, statistics reveal even
more people are killed by distracted motorists that text/talk
while driving.

Should we ban cell phones?

To argue these points about guns vs cars vs cell phones, we need more
data.

I want to see the data on the number of injuries and deaths caused by
the use of any of these consumer products in terms of hours (or
thousands of hours) of use.

For example, if you add up the number of hours that people spend in a
moving car per day (or per week, or per year, etc) and divide that by
the number of injuries and deaths that result, then we know something
about the number of hours of car-usage per injury and per death. Not
counting people being paid to drive (police / fire / ambulance /
commercial)

Now perform the same analysis on guns. It was even possible, determine
the total number of hours that guns are handled or carried by anyone
with access to guns. A few minutes here, a few minutes there, happening
on millions of occasions per day. And then count the number of injuries
and deaths resulting from gun use. Not counting suicides and gun-use by
police, security guards, etc. And not counting "protective" (defensive)
gun use by private citizens.

Comparing the number of negative or bad incidents per hours of use is a
standard way to measure the safety and the net benefit of consumer
products.

It is only when we have accurate numbers can we make a determination
that guns have a higher (or lower) liability than cars (or toasters, or
hammers, etc).

Also note that the vast majority of consumer products evolve and are
enhanced over time as technology allows and as gov't rules and
regulations (Consumer Product Safety Commission) requires. Cars have
many design changes and saftey enhancements today that they did not have
say 30 years ago. Can the same be said about guns?

An opinion on gun control
 

"Dean Hoffman" " wrote in message
...
Not mine.

This is from Larry Correia. New York Times bestselling author, firearm
instructor and former gun shop owner.
http://tinyurl.com/catntyr
The link leads to Monster Hunter Nation.
He has trained some Utah teachers and wants them to be armed at school
if they want to be.

Part of his comment on gun free zones:

Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period.
Think about it. You are a violent, homicidal madman, looking to make a
statement and hoping to go from disaffected loser to most famous person in
the world. The best way to accomplish your goals is to kill a whole bunch
of people. So where’s the best place to go shoot all these people?
Obviously, it is someplace where nobody can shoot back.
In all honesty I have no respect for anybody who believes Gun Free Zones
actually work. You are going to commit several hundred felonies, up to and
including mass murder, and you are going to refrain because there is a
sign? That No Guns Allowed sign is not a cross that wards off vampires. It
is wishful thinking, and really pathetic wishful thinking at that.

It is finally clear that something must be done. And over all the whooping
of the anti-gun crowd, I say, let them arm themselves with whatever they
have, just as our forefathers kicked the **** out of the British, using
only the very various and old firearms they had on hand against Brits with
government issued rifles.

It has been said here, Oh, maybe, but not with this gun or that one. Why
not? That is just what the bad guy may be carrying.

These scenarios will only get worse. I'm just surprised that they are not
taking place in common governmental meeting places where the people who are
shot at least deserved it for the most part. I'm surprised that some wacko
with at least several reasons hasn't attacked thusly, or maybe we are seeing
that coming with the recent attacks on first responders. I'm sure if the
bad guys wanted a Christmas list of guilty greedy public officials, they
would not have to look far or hard.

(ducking and seeing if I get a letter, or two guys in black suits, and a
black Ford)

Steve

An opinion on gun control
 

"Tony Hwang" wrote in message
...


Dean Hoffman wrote:
Not mine.

This is from Larry Correia. New York Times bestselling author,
firearm instructor and former gun shop owner.
http://tinyurl.com/catntyr
The link leads to Monster Hunter Nation.
He has trained some Utah teachers and wants them to be armed at
school if they want to be.

Part of his comment on gun free zones:

Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period.
Think about it. You are a violent, homicidal madman, looking to make a
statement and hoping to go from disaffected loser to most famous person
in the world. The best way to accomplish your goals is to kill a whole
bunch of people. So where’s the best place to go shoot all these people?
Obviously, it is someplace where nobody can shoot back.
In all honesty I have no respect for anybody who believes Gun Free Zones
actually work. You are going to commit several hundred felonies, up to
and including mass murder, and you are going to refrain because there is
a sign? That No Guns Allowed sign is not a cross that wards off
vampires. It is wishful thinking, and really pathetic wishful thinking
at that.

Hmmm,
Are you going to arm your self with assault rifle and 200 rounds magazine
or drum? You know wackos will come there with such a weapon with mass
killing power in short time. I am not against owning fire arm,
first step should be banning the ownership of assault type automatic
weapons and high capacity magazines/clips. And owning a gun is one thing
using it properly and well is another, how many owners are like that? Are
always ready for surprise attack? If teachers are armed can they
concentrate on teaching or be on the look oiut for the sudden danger? IMO,
the more gun, the more possibility of trouble. No thanks
no gun for me or my family.

Well, I think that hiring Barney Fife, and arming him with a Red Ryder BB
gun to go against an AR-15 should be adequate. At least for the members of
YOUR family. For mine, I don't mind whatever they want to shoot the crazy
******* with.

Steve

An opinion on gun control
 

"Doug" wrote

You really are quite the village idiot.


No you are. Guns are not drugs.

No, you both are by not following common sense about snippage. After
posting a few word answer to a hundreds of word quote, how can one ask for
any credibility?

Steve

An opinion on gun control
 

"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:38:42 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

I'm beginning to think he's a highly placed official in the War on
Drugs.

What ever happened to the War on Poverty?

The poor people got all that money from selling drugs. No more poverty. A
capitalist solution, No?

Steve

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 1:33*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 2:03 AM, harry wrote:









On Dec 26, 6:45 am, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/25/2012 11:21 PM, Homo Gay wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

Automobiles and explosives are also used by crazy people to kill
innocents. Heck, some real nut jobs used passenger jets to kill
thousands of folks. Gee, perhaps there should be a ban on cars,
trucks, airplanes and fertilizer. The only problem with banning
fertilizer is there would be nothing for Leftists to spew when
they open their mouths. ^_^

TDD

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Cowardice of gun owners? Hum, no fertilizer shortage in The U.K. I see. ^_^

TDD

Cowardice in that they attack the weak and undefended.
Cowardice in that others walk in fear of a vanishingly small possible
occurrence for their whole lives.

It's called paranoia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia
You only have to listen to the ravings of the gun nuts here to see how
they fit the description.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 2:02*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?

In fact since at least 1950, EVERY mass shooting (4 or more killed) took
place in a "gun free" zone, with but one (probable) exception: The shooting
of Gabby Giffords and others in a Tuscon parking lot. Even there, a
concealed handgun licensee was quickly on the scene to help prevent
additional killings.

Exactly why they are cowards. You must be really dense.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:57:42 -0700, "Steve B"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 23:38:42 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

I'm beginning to think he's a highly placed official in the War on
Drugs.

What ever happened to the War on Poverty?

The poor people got all that money from selling drugs. No more poverty. A
capitalist solution, No?

A libertarian solution, at least.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 2:14*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 8:02 AM, HeyBub wrote:

harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?

Yep, in The Terminator movie. Our friend Harry believes Americans get
their education from Hollywood so I'm lead to believe he does the same. ^_^

TDD

The terminator movie was fiction Duf. Try to get a grasp.

No real life massacrist would do that. They prefer helpless kids. Or
to shoot people down from a long range.
Innate cowards, like all gun owners.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:01:09 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

On Dec 26, 1:33*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 2:03 AM, harry wrote:









On Dec 26, 6:45 am, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/25/2012 11:21 PM, Homo Gay wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

Automobiles and explosives are also used by crazy people to kill
innocents. Heck, some real nut jobs used passenger jets to kill
thousands of folks. Gee, perhaps there should be a ban on cars,
trucks, airplanes and fertilizer. The only problem with banning
fertilizer is there would be nothing for Leftists to spew when
they open their mouths. ^_^

TDD

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Cowardice of gun owners? Hum, no fertilizer shortage in The U.K. I see. ^_^

TDD

Cowardice in that they attack the weak and undefended.

Which is why the weak and undefended need to arm themselves, you
stupid git!

Cowardice in that others walk in fear of a vanishingly small possible
occurrence for their whole lives.

Unbelievable...

It's called paranoia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia

It is *not* paranoia when there really are people who intend you harm,
as you pointed out above. harry, are you bipolar?

You only have to listen to the ravings of the gun nuts here to see how
they fit the description.

The gun grabbers, like you, are the ones running in circles barking at
the moon. Don't worry, harry, it'll set soon enough.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 2:21*pm, diy savant wrote:
On 12/26/2012 12:21 AM, Home Guy wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

I don't know the answer to this so I need your wisdom, Home Guy.

While I agree that gun deaths are tragic, statistics reveal even more
people are killed by distracted motorists that text/talk while driving.
* Should we ban cell phones?

Tch stupid idiot.
You ban their use in cars.
As we have done years ago in the UK.

An opinion on gun control
 

"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 13:04:10 -0500, wrote:

.380 used to be the go to caliber for pocket guns but Kimber has a
real nice 9mm now that is the size of most .380s
It s a bit spendy tho.

A .380 in the pocket is better than a .380 in the truck.

Love my little KelTec 3AT. Small enough to carry in any pocket, and not
arouse any suspicion whatsoever. It does poke small holes vs. 45 cal, and
all that nonsense, but just a couple of days ago, a PO was killed by a .380.
I'll take my chances when I take my wimpy little pistol. And when I want
more confidence, I just put on my .357 on a Safariland paddle. The muzzle
blast from that one is enough to stop every person in the room, and that is
360 degrees from direction of muzzle. Kinda like a stun grenade in an
enclosed room. Don't know, I never had the balls to try it in a closed
room. Might blow the glass out.

Steve

An opinion on gun control
 

"harry" wrote

Rubbish. You Have had gun massacres from day one in The USA.
I assume you have run out of indians and now must massacre one
another.
You have been massacring people in other countries, even Canadians in
1812.
It's a national problem as well as a personal problem.

A bit like the Roman empire. Collapsing in violence, depravity and
corruption.

*****

I figure we have a lot of time left if we start with the Canadians next.
Who would miss them?

Steve

An opinion on gun control
 

On 12/26/2012 11:01 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 26, 1:33 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 2:03 AM, harry wrote:


On Dec 26, 6:45 am, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/25/2012 11:21 PM, Homo Gay wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

Automobiles and explosives are also used by crazy people to kill
innocents. Heck, some real nut jobs used passenger jets to kill
thousands of folks. Gee, perhaps there should be a ban on cars,
trucks, airplanes and fertilizer. The only problem with banning
fertilizer is there would be nothing for Leftists to spew when
they open their mouths. ^_^

TDD

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Cowardice of gun owners? Hum, no fertilizer shortage in The U.K. I see. ^_^

TDD

Cowardice in that they attack the weak and undefended.
Cowardice in that others walk in fear of a vanishingly small possible
occurrence for their whole lives.

It's called paranoia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia
You only have to listen to the ravings of the gun nuts here to see how
they fit the description.


Gun nuts should always be protected by a properly fitted cup and
athletic supporter. Medicated sprays and powder can also be used
to control gun cooties. ^_^

TDD

An opinion on gun control
 

On 12/26/2012 11:06 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 26, 2:14 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 8:02 AM, HeyBub wrote:

harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?

Yep, in The Terminator movie. Our friend Harry believes Americans get
their education from Hollywood so I'm lead to believe he does the same. ^_^

TDD

The terminator movie was fiction Duf. Try to get a grasp.

No real life massacrist would do that. They prefer helpless kids. Or
to shoot people down from a long range.
Innate cowards, like all gun owners.


Gosh, how do those fellows in The SAS handle it? All those guns, they
must live in terror but wait, technically your government owns the guns
so your whole government is made up of cowards. ^_^

TDD

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 4:49*pm, "Steve B" wrote:
"Dean Hoffman" " wrote in message

...









*Not mine.

* This is from Larry Correia. *New York Times bestselling author, firearm
instructor and former gun shop owner.
* *http://tinyurl.com/catntyr
*The link leads to Monster Hunter Nation.
* He has trained some Utah teachers and wants them to be armed at school
if they want to be.

* Part of his comment on gun free zones:

Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period.
Think about it. You are a violent, homicidal madman, looking to make a
statement and hoping to go from disaffected loser to most famous person in
the world. The best way to accomplish your goals is to kill a whole bunch
of people. So where’s the best place to go shoot all these people?
Obviously, it is someplace where nobody can shoot back.
In all honesty I have no respect for anybody who believes Gun Free Zones
actually work. You are going to commit several hundred felonies, up to and
including mass murder, and you are going to refrain because there is a
sign? That No Guns Allowed sign is not a cross that wards off vampires. It
is wishful thinking, and really pathetic wishful thinking at that.

It is finally clear that something must be done. *And over all the whooping
of the anti-gun crowd, I say, let them arm themselves with whatever they
have, just as our forefathers kicked the **** out of *the British, using
only the very various and old firearms they had on hand against Brits with
government issued rifles.

What are you dribbling on about?
After we had sorted out Napolean, we drove you out of Washington and
burned the place down.
The commander of the British army sat in the White House and ate the
US president's dinner.
Then he burned it down.
Meanwhile all the yellowbelly Yanks had run.
We let you keep the fetid place because we had no use for it.

Boy they teach you some funny history lessons where ever you were
educated.

Oh, it was Hollywood!
They never made an epic John Wayne film about the sack of Washington.
Funny that eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_washington

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 5:29*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 11:06 AM, harry wrote:









On Dec 26, 2:14 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 8:02 AM, HeyBub wrote:

harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?

Yep, in The Terminator movie. Our friend Harry believes Americans get
their education from Hollywood so I'm lead to believe he does the same.. ^_^

TDD

The terminator movie was fiction Duf. Try to get a grasp.

No real life massacrist would do that. They prefer helpless kids. *Or
to shoot people down from a long range.
Innate cowards, like all gun owners.

Gosh, how do those fellows in The SAS handle it? All those guns, they
must live in terror but wait, technically your government owns the guns
so your whole government is made up of cowards. ^_^

TDD

The SAS is up against the armies of other countries.
Not school children and firefighters.

An opinion on gun control
 

On 12/26/2012 11:37 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 26, 5:29 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 11:06 AM, harry wrote:









On Dec 26, 2:14 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 8:02 AM, HeyBub wrote:

harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?

Yep, in The Terminator movie. Our friend Harry believes Americans get
their education from Hollywood so I'm lead to believe he does the same. ^_^

TDD

The terminator movie was fiction Duf. Try to get a grasp.

No real life massacrist would do that. They prefer helpless kids. Or
to shoot people down from a long range.
Innate cowards, like all gun owners.

Gosh, how do those fellows in The SAS handle it? All those guns, they
must live in terror but wait, technically your government owns the guns
so your whole government is made up of cowards. ^_^

TDD

The SAS is up against the armies of other countries.
Not school children and firefighters.


But they kill schoolchildren and innocent men and women in other
countries. O_o

TDD

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:26:45 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/26/2012 11:01 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 26, 1:33 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 2:03 AM, harry wrote:


On Dec 26, 6:45 am, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/25/2012 11:21 PM, Homo Gay wrote:

Ashton Crusher used improper usenet message composition style by
unnecessarily full-quoting:

One of the major problems with having a "discussion" of guns with
the anti-gunners is that so many of them are just incredibly
ignorant about guns.

We know that guns are used to intentionally kill children, movie-goers,
and fire-fighters.

What else is there to know?

Automobiles and explosives are also used by crazy people to kill
innocents. Heck, some real nut jobs used passenger jets to kill
thousands of folks. Gee, perhaps there should be a ban on cars,
trucks, airplanes and fertilizer. The only problem with banning
fertilizer is there would be nothing for Leftists to spew when
they open their mouths. ^_^

TDD

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Cowardice of gun owners? Hum, no fertilizer shortage in The U.K. I see. ^_^

TDD

Cowardice in that they attack the weak and undefended.
Cowardice in that others walk in fear of a vanishingly small possible
occurrence for their whole lives.

It's called paranoia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia
You only have to listen to the ravings of the gun nuts here to see how
they fit the description.


Gun nuts should always be protected by a properly fitted cup and
athletic supporter. Medicated sprays and powder can also be used
to control gun cooties. ^_^

Whereas harry has no need for any of that equipment.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 11:40:03 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/26/2012 11:37 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 26, 5:29 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 11:06 AM, harry wrote:









On Dec 26, 2:14 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 12/26/2012 8:02 AM, HeyBub wrote:

harry wrote:

Notable how these massacrists always go for the helpless.
Part oft he innate cowardice of gunowners.

Er, not exactly. These mass shooters do go for the helpless but in a "gun
free" zone. Ever hear of a mass shooting in a police station or gun shop?

Yep, in The Terminator movie. Our friend Harry believes Americans get
their education from Hollywood so I'm lead to believe he does the same. ^_^

TDD

The terminator movie was fiction Duf. Try to get a grasp.

No real life massacrist would do that. They prefer helpless kids. Or
to shoot people down from a long range.
Innate cowards, like all gun owners.

Gosh, how do those fellows in The SAS handle it? All those guns, they
must live in terror but wait, technically your government owns the guns
so your whole government is made up of cowards. ^_^

TDD

The SAS is up against the armies of other countries.
Not school children and firefighters.


But they kill schoolchildren and innocent men and women in other
countries. O_o

It's the only measure where they can beat the French.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Dec 26, 5:18*pm, "Steve B" wrote:
"harry" wrote

Rubbish. You Have had gun massacres from day one in The USA.
I assume you have run out of indians and now must massacre one
another.
You have been massacring people in other countries, even Canadians in
1812.
It's a national problem as well as a personal problem.

A bit like the Roman empire. Collapsing in violence, depravity and
corruption.

*****

I figure we have a lot of time left if we start with the Canadians next.
Who would miss them?

Steve

The last time you tried you were whipped and thrown out.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:12:15 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

On Dec 26, 5:18*pm, "Steve B" wrote:
"harry" wrote

Rubbish. You Have had gun massacres from day one in The USA.
I assume you have run out of indians and now must massacre one
another.
You have been massacring people in other countries, even Canadians in
1812.
It's a national problem as well as a personal problem.

A bit like the Roman empire. Collapsing in violence, depravity and
corruption.

*****

I figure we have a lot of time left if we start with the Canadians next.
Who would miss them?

Steve

The last time you tried you were whipped and thrown out.

I don't think you're Steve's type, harry.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:07:54 -0500, wrote:

Cowardice of gun owners? Hum, no fertilizer shortage in The U.K. I see. ^_^

TDD

Cowardice in that they attack the weak and undefended.

Which is why the weak and undefended need to arm themselves, you
stupid git!

Even the FBI indirectly supports that the elderly and women arm
themselves.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:16:50 -0700, "Steve B"
wrote:

A .380 in the pocket is better than a .380 in the truck.

Love my little KelTec 3AT. Small enough to carry in any pocket, and not
arouse any suspicion whatsoever. It does poke small holes vs. 45 cal, and
all that nonsense, but just a couple of days ago, a PO was killed by a .380.
I'll take my chances when I take my wimpy little pistol. And when I want
more confidence, I just put on my .357 on a Safariland paddle. The muzzle
blast from that one is enough to stop every person in the room, and that is
360 degrees from direction of muzzle. Kinda like a stun grenade in an
enclosed room. Don't know, I never had the balls to try it in a closed
room. Might blow the glass out.

Steve

I've said before, my .357 "barks over here and bites over yonder."

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:18:39 -0700, "Steve B"
wrote:


"harry" wrote

Rubbish. You Have had gun massacres from day one in The USA.
I assume you have run out of indians and now must massacre one
another.
You have been massacring people in other countries, even Canadians in
1812.
It's a national problem as well as a personal problem.

A bit like the Roman empire. Collapsing in violence, depravity and
corruption.

*****

I figure we have a lot of time left if we start with the Canadians next.
Who would miss them?

Steve


I think harry believes Napoleon was burning the Capitol when he was
really in France? I'm confused.

An opinion on gun control
 

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:34:07 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:16:50 -0700, "Steve B"
wrote:

A .380 in the pocket is better than a .380 in the truck.

Love my little KelTec 3AT. Small enough to carry in any pocket, and not
arouse any suspicion whatsoever. It does poke small holes vs. 45 cal, and
all that nonsense, but just a couple of days ago, a PO was killed by a .380.
I'll take my chances when I take my wimpy little pistol. And when I want
more confidence, I just put on my .357 on a Safariland paddle. The muzzle
blast from that one is enough to stop every person in the room, and that is
360 degrees from direction of muzzle. Kinda like a stun grenade in an
enclosed room. Don't know, I never had the balls to try it in a closed
room. Might blow the glass out.

Steve

I've said before, my .357 "barks over here and bites over yonder."

The nice thing about a .357 is that you can feed it .38 which is a lot
easier on the ears and wallet. The downside of mine is that it's way
too big to conceal (6" barrel), though that's not why I bought it.
Come to think of it, I didn't. My wife bought it for me. ;-)