This Is Why We Need the Second Amendment

[Boxlicker101]

http://news.yahoo.com/two-men-girl-human-shield-until-her-father-040007545.html

It's too bad he didn't off both the SOB's and save the state the expense of a trial and housing the bum for the next 20 years or so.

 

[Dream59]

http://news.yahoo.com/two-men-girl-human-shield-until-her-father-040007545.html

It's too bad he didn't off both the SOB's and save the state the expense of a trial and housing the bum for the next 20 years or so.

I have to agree with you. two to the chest and one to the head leaves a man dead. It also leaves them DRT. Which means dead right there, in other words they drop where they stood and there is no running away.

 

[toubab]

http://news.yahoo.com/two-men-girl-human-shield-until-her-father-040007545.html

It's too bad he didn't off both the SOB's and save the state the expense of a trial and housing the bum for the next 20 years or so.

Yes, two for two would have been much better, but one for two with several hits on the surviving one isn't bad.

 

[eyer]

http://news.yahoo.com/two-men-girl-human-shield-until-her-father-040007545.html

It's too bad he didn't off both the SOB's and save the state the expense of a trial and housing the bum for the next 20 years or so.

That's cute, boxyapper...

...and, pondering your contribution above just a second more, it comes immediately to mind that you're the perfect foil to bozos bronzeage and de Wannabe who love to play the other side of this totally childish game.

Did you hear about the person killed in the Walmart store recently by the man-and-wife Vegas murderers?

Seems he was with a buddy when he observed the the male murderer enter the store, blast off some rounds, and yell something about a revolution beginning. This dude was carrying concealed and told his buddy he was going to stop it; so he started toward the murderer...

...unfortunately for him he never observed that the female cop killer had already entered the store, and when she observed him advancing toward her dear (and thankfully now dead) husband, she plugged him.

You and your playmates are just like that bozo, boxorocks...

...for every time you subjectively choose to publish a piece that you believe supports your drivel and you advance it, you totally fail to realize that there's another piece in play that totally neutralizes what you so foolishly believe is righteous.

 

[marie_julie_200]

Alternative perspective;
http://gawker.com/its-really-hard-to-be-a-good-guy-with-a-gun-1588660306

 

[Sean Renaud]

That's not a good reason for us to have the Second Amendment. Lets ignore the fact that apparently they pulled off some Hollywood style bullshit if the perps hadn't had guns the situation wouldn't have been likely to have occured in the first place.

We don't need the second amendment at all. We want it. Most of us, myself included, but we shouldn't pretend that it's anything short of wanting people to live out their Jack Bauer fantasies of being able to hit the perp without hurting the daughter like something out of a movie. Real life doesn't often work like this.

 

[Boxlicker101]

That's cute, boxyapper...

...and, pondering your contribution above just a second more, it comes immediately to mind that you're the perfect foil to bozos bronzeage and de Wannabe who love to play the other side of this totally childish game.

Did you hear about the person killed in the Walmart store recently by the man-and-wife Vegas murderers?

Seems he was with a buddy when he observed the the male murderer enter the store, blast off some rounds, and yell something about a revolution beginning. This dude was carrying concealed and told his buddy he was going to stop it; so he started toward the murderer...

...unfortunately for him he never observed that the female cop killer had already entered the store, and when she observed him advancing toward her dear (and thankfully now dead) husband, she plugged him.

You and your playmates are just like that bozo, boxorocks...

...for every time you subjectively choose to publish a piece that you believe supports your drivel and you advance it, you totally fail to realize that there's another piece in play that totally neutralizes what you so foolishly believe is righteous.

What does this have to do with the OP? The link there describes a husband and wife protecting themselves and their daughter from two armed intruders. In this instance, two good guys with guns did defeat two bad guys with guns.

 

[DooleyDarter]

What does this have to do with the OP? The link there describes a husband and wife protecting themselves and their daughter from two armed intruders. In this instance, two good guys with guns did defeat two bad guys with guns.

Libtards aren't happy unless those family members die, they really hate to see low lifes injured in any way after all, that's their voting base.

 

[Boxlicker101]

That's not a good reason for us to have the Second Amendment. Lets ignore the fact that apparently they pulled off some Hollywood style bullshit if the perps hadn't had guns the situation wouldn't have been likely to have occured in the first place.

We don't need the second amendment at all. We want it. Most of us, myself included, but we shouldn't pretend that it's anything short of wanting people to live out their Jack Bauer fantasies of being able to hit the perp without hurting the daughter like something out of a movie. Real life doesn't often work like this.

It's an excellent reason for having the Second Amendment. If the man and woman hadn't been armed, they and their daughter probably would have been raped and murdered. Even if the Second Amendment were to be repealed, the two thugs would have been armed. They were criminals, and criminals are not usually very concerned with following the law.

 

[eyer]

What does this have to do with the OP? The link there describes a husband and wife protecting themselves and their daughter from two armed intruders. In this instance, two good guys with guns did defeat two bad guys with guns.

You really don't even begin to comprehend the whole different side of the same coin deal, do ya.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You really don't even begin to comprehend the whole different side of the same coin deal, do ya.

I'm familiar with the concept but I don't see what it has to do with this situation. There are tens of millions of weapons available and criminals own or control a high percentage of them. If the Second Amendment were to be repealed, honest people would be disarmed and easy pickings for the criminals.

The OP presents a good example because, as I say, the man and woman and their daughter would have been victims if they hadn't been legally armed. The intruders were armed also, and they would have been armed even with no Second Amendment.

"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" is more than a bumper sticker. It is a true statement.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

...for every time you subjectively choose to publish a piece that you believe supports your drivel and you advance it, you totally fail to realize that there's another piece in play that totally neutralizes what you so foolishly believe is righteous.

Which is why it is pointless to attempt to justify or condemn various elements of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights on the basis of anecdotal outcomes.

What's the latest count on the number of factually guilty defendants who've beaten the rap by application of the Fourth or Fifth Amendments?

 

[Skiddles2014]

Guns in the home are good.

Guns on your person in a mall or restaurant is gay.

 

[eyer]

Which is why it is pointless to attempt to justify or condemn various elements of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights on the basis of anecdotal outcomes.

What's the latest count on the number of factually guilty defendants who've beaten the rap by application of the Fourth or Fifth Amendments?

Asking an inane question ending with ...

...seems to suit you to a tee, Corporal.

 

[eyer]

If the Second Amendment were to be repealed, honest people would be disarmed and easy pickings for the criminals.

The Second Amendment hasn't been repealed...

...and yet the honest and armed person in the Walmart was still "easy pickings for the criminals."

What was your irrelevant point again?

 

[Boxlicker101]

The Second Amendment hasn't been repealed...

...and yet the honest and armed person in the Walmart was still "easy pickings for the criminals."

What was your irrelevant point again?

Perhaps so but the couple in St. Louis defended themselves successfully, thereby reducing the population of scumbags by one who died and one who is in prison.

 

[eyer]

Perhaps so but the couple in St. Louis defended themselves successfully, thereby reducing the population of scumbags by one who died and one who is in prison.

That's beauteeful, boxyapper...

 

[Boxlicker101]

That's beauteeful, boxyapper...

I know. That's why I started the thread.

 

[Sean Renaud]

It's an excellent reason for having the Second Amendment. If the man and woman hadn't been armed, they and their daughter probably would have been raped and murdered. Even if the Second Amendment were to be repealed, the two thugs would have been armed. They were criminals, and criminals are not usually very concerned with following the law.

No, without the Second the thugs would be much less likely to be armed and criminals are usually fairly concerned with following the law. That's just another stupid thing Republicans say that isn't true. It's amazing how you guys never even stop to observe the world before buying into your BS.

 

[Boxlicker101]

No, without the Second the thugs would be much less likely to be armed and criminals are usually fairly concerned with following the law. That's just another stupid thing Republicans say that isn't true. It's amazing how you guys never even stop to observe the world before buying into your BS.

No, they still would have been armed. Maybe with switchblades rather than guns, but armed nevertheless. They certainly would not have been looking for a fist fight.

Criminals might be concerned with the following the law when driving or something else but they are certainly not concerned with following the law while committing their depredations. If they were, they wouldn't be committing those depredations.

 

[Sean Renaud]

No, they still would have been armed. Maybe with switchblades rather than guns, but armed nevertheless. They certainly would not have been looking for a fist fight.

Criminals might be concerned with the following the law when driving or something else but they are certainly not concerned with following the law while committing their depredations. If they were, they wouldn't be committing those depredations.

Maybe not even switchblades, we can outlaw those too. (They are in many places) But you're probably right they would have been armed. How they were armed makes all the difference in the world.

More than just when driving. A lot of them will specifically avoid things like murder or being caught with a weapon because the charges for those are much higher. (Though the flip side is they occasionally get really desperate and do things they wouldn't otherwise do because the punishment is so severe.) Sorry, reality ensues.

 

[Liar]

If the Second Amendment were to be repealed, honest people would be disarmed and easy pickings for the criminals.

Wrong.

If the Second Amendment were to be repealed, honest people MIGHT be disarmed. Or they might not.

More to the point, the Second Amendment won't be repealed, so what are you bitching about?

 

[Liar]

No, they still would have been armed. Maybe with switchblades rather than guns, but armed nevertheless. They certainly would not have been looking for a fist fight.

And the family would have been armed with kitchen knives, baseball bats and frying pans.

 

[Boxlicker101]

And the family would have been armed with kitchen knives, baseball bats and frying pans.

What good would those things have done when the thugs had their daughter with a knife at her throat. If the family had moved in to make a fight of it, they would have had a daughter with her throat slashed open.

I say that because what the intruders did was to hold a gun to the daughter's head. If they had been armed only with knives, they would have used one of them instead and would have been able to use it.

But that's speculation. If they had known the family was armed with guns, they probably would have gone elsewhere, although there's no way to tell.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Why would they have gone else where? Unless they knew the family was stupid enough to risk the daughter's life needlessly and good enough shots to take a movie shot their plan was sound.