Results 11 to 18 of 18
|
-
03-07-2013, 12:57 PM
You insist on misinterpreting everything I say so that you can justify your hatred. Fine. I never said that she shouldn't have had a gun, or that she wouldn't have been able to use it to protect herself. What I said is that I don't know whether it would have helped this woman or not, but that neither did the representative in question. I am admitting my ignorance about guns. I've never claimed to know anything about guns, which is one of many reasons I don't take an anti-gun stand (the 2nd Amendment being the main reason).
-
03-07-2013, 01:16 PM
While we accept that you are not personally anti-gun, you do vote for Democratic politicians who are vehemently anti-gun. Given that it's not an issue of major concern for you, that is understandable, but you also understand that if you vote for the dogs, you end up with the fleas.
--Odysseus
Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.
Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
-
03-07-2013, 02:40 PM
First, I didn't misinterpret your response but perhaps you yourself are a little fuzzy about the issue. Exactly what was the point of your statement that a gun might not have helped her? We know the representative is a gun control advocate so she can't make any other argument than the weak one that she did. If you're not a gun control advocate then why would you position yourself similarly to the Colorado rep? It's a lame argument. If you can produce some emperical data that shows that women wielding guns are just as likely to be raped as women without guns, then fine. But when you jumped in with the weak and naive "it might not have helped her" dribble you, perhaps unwittingly, aligned yourself with the Colorado gun controller.
Second, don't project your hatred on me. I may find 0bama butt kissing liberals disgusting but I don't hate anybody. I refuse to waste the energy. If you feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel hatred from me or any other conservative then it's simply that you're trying to justify your hatred for me and, perhaps, others, via some misguided emotional equivalency.Last edited by Unreconstructed Reb; 03-07-2013 at 04:34 PM.
"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that you won't need it until they try to take it away."---Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
-
03-07-2013, 02:50 PM
Years ago, I witnessed a shooting. A guy was laying next to my car with a bullet wound in his side. A day later we find that the guy was down the street in a laundry mat in an apartment complex, on top of a girl trying to rape her. She had a 38 in her pocket and was able to put a round in his side. Guy didn't die, but he stopped messing with her.
I'd rather her have the opportunity to have one than not.Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown
The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
-
#15 Speaking of chances...
03-07-2013, 07:12 PM
"...chances are that if you had had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly use it against you...”
IMHO the the chances are very high that this Senator Hudak is lacking in the area of common sense. Any edge beats no edge or chance. Of course the good Senator has professional security, i'll wager.Support diversity. Own firearms of every caliber.
-
03-07-2013, 07:57 PM
Strange though, that no one advocates taking guns away from the police using the same logic....
There are no national statistics on how many times officers' guns are taken away. But the FBI says that of the 616 law enforcement officers killed on duty by criminals from 1994 through 2003, 52 were killed with their own weapon, amounting to 8 percent.We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.
~John Adams
-
03-12-2013, 10:30 AM
Evidently, self-help is discouraged. Just wet your pants or vomit on yourself or tell the man you have AIDS, according to the Dems..
Obama-if you're being run out of town, get out in front and pretend that it's a parade!!!
-
03-12-2013, 11:52 AM
--Odysseus
Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.
Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
« Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
$ is the symbol for the Repubs....
Yesterday, 11:00 PM in Best/Worst of DU/Discussionist