"I'm sure that the actions and inaction of congress have nothing to do with this either."

Posted by MSgt at 2008-07-03 11:30 AM

You mean the congress that was majority republican and in lockstep with Bush for 6 years? Or the current Lieberaman that blocks everything the dems try to do.

sorry--their written consent

Vernon

You have it backwards. The board is conservative--not liberal. The teacher is a liberal.

I saw the news video on CNN and the Board Members said they were put there by the public and the public didn't want books with that kind of language taught to their kids. However, 149 of the 150 parents involved gave there written consent for the book to be taught to their child. It seems the school board doesn't know shit about what the community wants.

Restricting books and thought is conservative territory. You think liberals are against books, yet you think the universities are full of liberals--and don't see the conflict.

How about that.

BL2

I would bet good money that you think your posts made sense. You are mistaken.

I am dead against any faith based anything, and Obama is fucking up big time by giving tax dollars to any religious group. Only zombies like yourself go lockstep with whatever your God Bush wants. I didn't hear you protesting his faith based programs--why do it now just because it is Obama? You prove your brainwashing was effective. Vote for McCain--he's brainwashed too.

Rathergate was a travesty of logic. The facts reported were true, but because they were written on papers that weren't the originals, the facts didn't matter.

BL2

If you vote republican and you aren't rich--you are stupid.
The only people who should vote republican are people who make more than 200k a year.
Republicansd aren't for America and Americans--republicans are for money, and fuck everything and everyone else.

YOu keep bringing up socialism like it is a bad thing. Inorder for a country to be strong, its people must be strong. Writhing in poverty doesn't make a strong nation. The government should see to it that its PEOPLE are stong--not just the top 1%.

The top 1% doesn't WORK for their money--they get it by investments from forebears, or sports or entertainment. Few produce anything. Bill Gates doesn't work very hard I assure you. If you can GIVE a hundred million away, higher taxes won't be much of an effect.

Facts are wealth will be redistributed one way or another. The French revolution--the Russian Revolution, and the American revolution have proven that simple fact in tha past.

People like you need it proven again and again.

Is here another jurisdiction that stands ready to judge him?

Posted by townncountry at 2008-07-02 10:28 PM | Reply

I think Joe Horn is being judged by the court of public opinion. He is as much a criminal as OJ. Shooting unarmed men in the back as they run away, without giving them the chance to surrender is not heroic. It is cowardly and despicable.

BL2

And you see that as a reason to have more guns.

You are a stupid person.

Guns are the problem, not the solution.

Joe horn wouldn't have done anything--these people had guns, and I doubt they would have turned their backs on the coward Joe Horn.

It should be obvious to all but the most brain dead that McCain would be another puppet President along the lines of Reagan, Bush the 1st, and Bush the 2nd. They made no decisions and did not lead. They took orders. That's why McCain is flip flopping so much.

He's just learning to take orders.

A toaster oven and some junk jewelery???

Posted by AntiCadillac at 2008-07-02 08:20 PM | Reply |

You forget--it was a four slicer toaster--very valuable in Texas.

GOT...YOU JUST DONT GET IT DO YOU....you are trying to reason with somebody that will bring a car antennea to a gun fight

Posted by judas at 2008-07-02 07:07 PM | Reply

NOW WTF are you talking about? Are you trying to prove your stupidity? It is evident--no more proof is necessary.

BB... is not concerned about criminals with guns....he is concerned about you a ordinary american with a gun

Not at all. I have stated several times that I am pro-gun and why.

BB...does not care about how to disarm criminals and gangs....he is concerned about disarming you

Not at all--I would very much like to disarm gangs, but the NRA is against such action. I am for the second amendment--unlike the NRA which tries to infringe on the right to bear arms--I say all Americans have the right to bear arms and that right should not be infringed--no registration--no limitation--just like the second amendment says--the right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. But the government says I can't have automatic weapons--or bazookas--or tanks or gunships or submarines or fighter aircraft or bombers or nuclear arms or biological arms or chemical arms. THAT'S what the second amendment says I have the right to, and the government is infringing on that right.

Posted by judas at 2008-07-02 07:32 PM | Reply |

Joe Horn = OJ

No one quotes limbaugh, you twit.

If only he had a handgun. Oh yeah they are illegal in DC. Unless you plan to use it in a crime. Not sure there is a ban on that use.

Posted by crispee_oc at 2008-07-02 07:03 PM | Reply | Flag

This same problem will be around in 500 years, or 5000 years. You pants pissers have to give rights to criminals to carry guns.

The guy who shot the blogger has every right to own that gun--thanks to morons like you.

Morons who think a gun is protection. Frightened, little, people.

Thebull

So let's shoot shoplifters and speeders. Fuckers shouldn't be speeding--look how many lives speeders cost last year. No need for trials--WTF--shoot them like dogs in the street. That's the American way.

idiot.

I doubt you pants pissers could handle a good car antennae. You can't shoot people in the back with a car antennae.

You might be able to handle a spiked heel--if you can get one off fast enough.

burned from both ends of the candle!

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-06-27 04:59 PM

What a sicko.

;-)

twice really made it stick...

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-07-02 11:20 AM

and he's a perv too.

If you had some sort of swatting device, like say, a car antennae, couldn't you just bat the grenade back out through the window, killing the intruder?

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-07-01 04:40

Now there is a nutcase.

;-)

"Even a rock or a club."
Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-07-02 10:56 AM | Reply

You are an asshole for taking things so out of context.

;-)

"I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun..."
Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-07-02 10:54 AM |

You are an asshole for taking things so out of context.

;-)

Goatman

If you are going to be a pedantic ass--fuck off. I never said ALL cops--I said cops. Which means a majority. If you believe otherwise, I am sure you are correct. Talk to someone who gives a shit about your opinion.

Goatman

The first was an audio link. The second was the mayor of DC--I doubt the cops want more violence, and the mayor speaks for them as far as I'm concerned.

You weren't invited to the conversation or the scenario.

I did not realize that DR threads were by invitation only. My bad.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-02 06:35 AM

When you infuse up a conversation with nonsense, you should expect to be told to fuck off. It's like having a drunk interrupt a conversation. We were talking about a knife and a car antennae, and you kept bringing up guns. Rudeness is not welcomed anywhere.

Kennesaw is not the safest city in the USA--How do you explain that?

Deflection. I never said it was. Nor did I say guns made a city the safest. My claim was that gun ownership suddenly dropped the crime rate in Kennesaw and kept it down.

That is true--what is your point if not that gun ownership makes cities safer, and that therefore the more guns the safer the city? Obviously that wasn't your point as I suggested, so what was your point?

How do you explain that all the Old West cities banned guns

I'm sure the local authorities had their specific reasons. Name one town that did and I'll see if I can find the history of that town for you.

Dodge City.

BTW, conemporarily speaking, the crime rate in Morton Grove Illinois (the city that Kennesaw was responding to) did not drop after they banned guns. How do you explain that?

Why should I explain that? How do you explain that?

Why are cops against everyone having guns?

I'm not sure this is true. Do you have a link?

"Well, as long as we are playing make-believe, what about an ice cream sundae (fudge) vs a piney woods lizard -- assuming proper wrist action with the lizard, of course."

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-02 06:23 AM |

WE aren't playing anything. You weren't invited to the conversation or the scenario. The scenario was about a knife and a car antennae.

Wrist action not important with a gun.

My dad always said, "right tool for the right job". IOW, don't try to use a pistol to improve FM reception.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-02 06:13 AM | Reply

A gun is not involved in this scenario. This discussion concerns a knife and a car antennae. No guns--no bazookas--no biological weapons. Knives and car antennaes.

bOoB: quid pro quo. How do you explain the drop in crime in Kennesaw, GA and the fact that it stayed lower after a mandatory gun law was passed.

You keep refusing to answer. From that, I read two things: 1) You have no answer that doesn't contradict your theory of what what happen if everyone had a gun and 2) I am right in what I always say: You demand answers to questions yet never answer them yourself.

Looks like I'm right and you are wrong on two different items here. Or are you going to grow a set and answer?

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-02 05:47 AM | Reply |

Kennesaw is a small sampling. Just because it works there, doesn't mean it is a Universal Truth. Look at a larger sampling--like the Old West. In case you missed it--that was the answer to your question about the drop in crime rate in Kennesaw. I'll post it again if you like.

Kennesaw is not the safest city in the USA--How do you explain that? How do you explain that all the Old West cities banned guns? Why would they do that when guns make cities safer?

Why are cops against everyone having guns?

Facts are guns are for people too stupid to protect themselves any other way, and the irony is that the chances of the gun being more of a threat to them and their family than being robbed are against the gun owner.

I'll take a three foot reach and speed over a guy with a knife any day.

I'll take a gun any day.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-02 05:52 AM

I'll take a bazooka anyday.

"Ever been hit with a car antenna?? Sure it hurts but guess what happens when the car antenna strikes You?? It bends just exactly like a limp dick and then it's useless. Most car antennas are just made of pot metal or thin gauged chrome plated copper tubing so they aren't very beefy."

Larry

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-07-02 05:35 AM | Reply |

If you swing through on a solid objct, you are correct--however swinging through lacks a sting. If you flick it with your wrist and aim just an inch or so past your target, you get a nice sting and your antennae doesn't bend.

Scheifox

I doubt your fantasy stories about being attacked by guys with guns and knives and killing them. What a super hero you are. I guess they died instantly and didn't have the heart to pull the trigger on you--or maybe your first shot was in the barrel of their gun. Were they over 12 yrs old? Under 90?

Unless the guy has already stabbed you, a car antenna is very effective. You don't need ninja skills. If you think you can't take eyes out with one, I doubt you know what a car antennae is. I'll take a three foot reach and speed over a guy with a knife any day. It's like a guy with a sword against a guy with a dagger. No contest. Try it sometime. You have a rubber knife and goggles--give your opponent a car antennae. If he whacks your goggles three times on one side, that eye is gone. If you stab him, you win. Give it a shot--see what happens. You should also wear more head protection, and gloves. Antennaes are hell on knuckles.

Sickoflibs

It isn't worth my while. I wouldn't want to do life in prison for proving a point to your stupid ass.

See if you have an imagination. You have stolen millions from the mob and they have hired me--their favorite hitman--to kill you.

I sit across the street from where you live with my nice scoped rifel and shot yu as you go to work or the store or out to mow the lawn.

They pay me to be up close and personal? I knock on your door and when you answer it I blow your nuts off and let you think about it for a second before I put one in each eye. They pay well for details.

Your defense?

My links prove it.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 10:27 PM

Yeah right. Answer the questions.

If your point about thast city were valid--why not arm everyone in the country?

If your point about that city were valid--why do you think the towns of the Old West eventually banned guns?

Your gun will not protect you, because the bad guy gets to make the first move.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 10:21 PM | Reply

"The number one deterrent for intruders is the perceived probability of being killed."

Posted by Zatoichi at 2008-07-01 10:22 PM | Reply

That's why they break in when you aren't home.

Google Kennesaw Georgia to see literally hundreds of other links like this one.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 10:08 PM | Reply

I could give a fuck about some hick town that has nothing to steal. That the two hoods stop stealing candy bars is no surprise.

If your idea is so great, let's give everyone in the bad parts of town guns, and see how that works out. Facts are if anyone wanted to fuck up anyone in Kennesaw, all they have to do is start shooting. Their guns are no protection, and they would be an enticement for others to break in when the people aren't home. As stated--you could answer the door with your gun in your hand, and it would not be able to protect you since the bad guy makes the first move. I guess you just don't get it.

Here is a good example. Bank robbery. A bank has an armed guard at the door--sometimes two. Yet banks get robbed. WHY--because the bank robbers make the first move. The guards guns did not protect them.

Here is another scenario. A cop walks up to the door of a driver he has stopped for speeding--the driver shoots the cop and drives away. The cops gun did not protect him. WHY--because the bad guys make the first move.

If your point about thast city were valid--why not arm everyone in the country?

If your point about that city were valid--why do you think the towns of the Old West eventually banned guns?

Your gun will not protect you, because the bad guy gets to make the first move.

I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun ...

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 12:40 PM

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 09:57 PM | Reply

Why not quote the whole thing?

Guy pulls a knife, you pull a gun.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-07-01 12:28 PM | Reply |

Guy pulls a gun first--takes your gun.

I would say any criminal that tries to hold someone up with a knife is a fool, but if he has a knife and you make a move, you could be sliced pretty bad and there's no guarantee you shoot him or don't have the gun used on you. No guarantee the bullet won't go through him and kill someone else.

I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun in that situation. Even a rock or a club.

Thinking you will be the only one with a gun is wishful thinking.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 12:40 PM | Reply

A car jacking at gun point, well if the stupid bastard loweres his gun or looks the other way, he is going to die. Do I really have to give more examples or is your mini brain capable of figuring it out yet?

Posted by sickoflibs at 2008-07-01 09:52 PM | Reply

Won't wash. Either you hope the guy has a knife, or you hope he looks away and you get a chance to pull your wepon and kill him insantly before he has the chance to blow your brains out. People don't always die right away like they do in the movies.

With everyone being armed, the carjacker would have to assume you were armed and just beat the fuck out of you and take your weapon, or just shoot your ass and avoid all discussion.
After all, he has to assume you are a backshooter also, and why take the chance?

101--you think shooting a man armed with an RPG in a war situation is the same as shooting two unarmed men in the back with a shotgun? No wait--the man shooting the guy with the RPG is a war criminal, and the guy with the shotgun is a hero.

What are you worried about, bOoB? Well armed Texans would be no match against you and your mighty car antennae

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 09:49 PM | Reply

I was matching a car antenna against a knife dUmMY. You never get anything right.

;-)

"What would reduce crime is giving police complete authority over your life--

Wrong. I'm not a criminal. I do not commit crimes."

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 09:31 PM | Reply

Of course--innocent people are never jailed or shot. You are a criminal if the government says you are a criminal. You are guilty of whatever the government says you are guilty of. All rights come from the government. The right to shoot unarmed men in the back comes from the government. The right to imprison you for life for pissing off the wrong person comes from the government.

We're sorry we ever joined.

Honest.

I had family at San Jacinto and I had family build the fucking monument.

My late mother-in-law on the Bush family:

"God Damned Carpetbaggers ... "

Posted by Zatoichi at 2008-07-01 09:42 PM | Reply

I can understand that and sympathize with you. I'm sure most Texans agree with you. Get your legislature to bring up secession. I will support it. I'm sure most of America would join you in your effort.

Great idea. We already have a good economy, low cost of living, great weather, lots of jobs. We could then join OPEC and get rich selling oil insatiable oil hogs like you, bOoB. Best of all, there'd be no crime.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 09:38 PM | Reply |

Get your legislature to bring up secession. I will support it. I'm sure most of America would join you in your effort.

Even cops tell fleeing criminals to HALT before they shoot them. This guy just shot two unarmed men in the back--and he's your hero--the guy you'd like to be--the man you hope your son grows up to be. Backshooting cowards all. The Texas way and they're proud of it.

Well Boob, besides the fact that I have actually had tactical training and know what I am doing with it and the fact that I remain aware of what is happening around me. Thats gives me one step up from most criminals. A gun is not a bullet proof vest but the other guy better be faster, and shoot more accurate than me.

Most of the bad guys get their training from watching rap videos or some crappy movie. Fails in comparison to the real thing.

Posted by sickoflibs at 2008-07-01 09:24 PM | Reply | Fla

How is your gun a protection. How do you see your gun protecting you? Are you hoping the guy pulls a knife too?

Can you tell me the scenario where your gun protects you?

If it reduces crime, it's a good idea

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 09:08 PM | Reply

What would reduce crime is giving police complete authority over your life--just like Iran. Let them shoot onsight anyone they deem unfit for society--including speeders, who are known to cause thousans of deaths per year on the road. I would say putting snipers on the highways with speed cameras and take out 15-20 speeders a week would cut down on the crime of speeding wuite a bit.

I would say that shooting shoplifters would be a great deterent, as would shooting jaywalkers who endanger law abiding drivers.

Shooting someone for crossing your yard should be entirely legal since they were probably going to break into your house, and besides you had the sign--keep off the grass--posted.

I would say that it is definitely fair to shoot people for TPing your house or soaping your windows on Holloween, and in fact, for knocking on your door and asking for candy. Especially if it is posted for no soliciting.
Stay out of Texas? Sure--I'd like to get Texas out of America. They just don't share American values. I don't think any more proof is required.

America:
Death penalty for breaking and entering.

If you think that is a good idea--how about cutting the hands off thieves,and just adopting Sharia law? Maybe shoot people for thinking god doesn't want you shooting people.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 07:58 PM

America:
Death penalty for breaking and entering.

If you think that is a good idea--how about cutting the hands off thieves,and just adopting Sharia law? Maybe shoot people for thinking god doesn't want you shooting people.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 07:58 PM

America:
Death penalty for breaking and entering.

If you think that is a good idea--how about cutting the hands off thieves,and just adopting Sharia law? Maybe shoot people for thinking god doesn't want you shooting people.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 07:58 PM

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 08:40 PM | Reply | Flag

America:
Death penalty for breaking and entering.

If you think that is a good idea--how about cutting the hands off thieves,and just adopting Sharia law? Maybe shoot people for thinking god doesn't want you shooting people.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 07:58 PM

America:
Death penalty for breaking and entering.

If you think that is a good idea--how about cutting the hands off thieves,and just adopting Sharia law? Maybe shoot people for thinking god doesn't want you shooting people.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 07:58 PM

America:
Death penalty for breaking and entering.

If you think that is a good idea--how about cutting the hands off thieves,and just adopting Sharia law? Maybe shoot people for thinking god doesn't want you shooting people.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-07-01 07:58 PM

"So you're a dumb-ass as well huh?
Why don't you show me and the rest of the class where he was convicted of breaking that law. You of all people should know how the courts work eh creepy?

You are a first class dumbshit."

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2008-07-01 07:55 PM

I'm sure you supported OJ when he was found not guilty also. After all, OJ broke no law, and I'm sure you are not the type of dumbshit who thinks he did.

America:
Death penalty for breaking and entering.

If you think that is a good idea--how about cutting the hands off thieves,and just adopting Sharia law? Maybe shoot people for thinking god doesn't want you shooting people.

I carry my gun for protection Boob, would you care to come try your theory?

Posted by sickoflibs at 2008-07-01 02:45 PM

I doubt if someone really wanted to kill you, that your gun would protect you. Kennedy had the entire US military as protection, and was surrounded by armed Secret Service personnel. Guess what happened.

I carry my gun for protection Boob, would you care to come try your theory?

Posted by sickoflibs at 2008-07-01 02:45 PM

I understand you carry your gun for protection. My question is--in what circumstances do you see your gun protecting you? Some guy pulls a gun on you--what do you do? How is your gun a protection. How do you see your gun protecting you? Are you hoping the guy pulls a knife too?

How would you feel if the police acted the same way with all criminal suspects?

"safer"

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-01 01:25 PM | Reply

Maybe we should just shoot people instead of arresting them so you feel safe.

"On average, 1 to 2 people in Texas die each year from venomous snake bites"

www.dshs.state.tx.us

Posted by Zatoichi at 2008-07-01 01:28 PM |

Chances are they didn't see the snake first. Maybe they just like to play with them or pray with them.

Maybe then you will see that Obama is a flip flopper and not just trying to "include other positions"..

At least be honest Danni.

Posted by MURPHY at 2008-07-01 01:26 PM | Reply

Yeah, right. Try reality.

Funny, he was not convicted, nor even indited, he was CLEARED, thus, no broken law, too bad you cant read.

Posted by kc101 at 2008-07-01 01:19 PM

How would you feel if the police acted the same way with all criminal suspects?

What would you have done with the snake boob? Be very specific, because for every answer you give somebody will counter with some absurd qualifier (sound familiar dummy?).

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2008-07-01 01:15 PM | Reply

I have given no absurd qualifires. As to the snake, I would have gotten a long stick, maybe two, put it in a cooler and driven it further out into the desert.

Has anyone else ever noticed that in Boobs world the criminals are smart cookies.
It's as if he believes they read the news, gather information, plan their capers, and execute them flawlessly.

There are no stupid criminals in Boobs world. They're all as fast with their guns as Wyatt Earp, and all move like cats.

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2008-07-01 01:05 PM | Reply

Well, let's see. How many break ins do you think happened last week? How many burglars were shot? Maybe because they break in when people aren't there.

My point is that professional burglars will recognize the risk and will shoot rather than run.

In your world all criminals are stupid and waiting to be shot.

I don't have any pepper spray.
Nor do I have a taser.

Posted by Zatoichi at 2008-07-01 01:08 PM

Or the brains to handle a snake without shooting it.

Great parenting skills. Leave pepper spray and tazers around for the kids to play with.

For the record, I don't own a gun and probably never will. But I can see it's advantages.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-07-01 12:49 PM | Reply

No kids, but if there were some around you could still get to those items faster than you could get to your gun. They don't have to be loaded, and if used, they wouldn't accidently blow the little snowflakes brains all over the living room.

For the record, I don't own a gun and probably never will. But I can see it's advantages.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-07-01 12:49 PM | Reply |

Then why not explsin those advantages?

I'll follow your lead and make up something ridiculous to disprove your scenario.

The guy could be a Chuck Norris ninja and take your car antennae and then carve a crop circle in your left butt cheek.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-07-01 12:45 PM

If the guy were Chuck Norris, he wouldn't need the knife. It's not ridiculous at all. I will gladly give you a knife and take out your eyes with a car antennae then whip you till you cry like a little girl. You can walk down the street with a car antennae and the cops won't stop you. The point is you think a gun is a defensve weapon. It is not. It is an offensive weapon. If you are under seige, it is a good time to have a gun, but if the government is on the other side, your gun won't help. Waco proved that.

The problem is that the bad guys always make the first move--that being the case, your gun is useless if they consider that you will have a weapon and take it into account.

The guy who will rob you on the street MUST assume you have a gun and treat you accordingly when he holds you up.

The burglar who comes into your house MUST assume you have a weapon and act accordingly. But usually, if they know you have weapons, they break in when you aren't there and take your weapons. You don't think these bad guys BUY their weapons do you?

"If someone gets into your house, which would you rather have, a handgun or a telephone?

www.realclearpolitics.com

Posted by Pirate at 2008-07-01 12:34 PM |

An alarm calling the cops and waking the neighborhood. But the sign in the yard should stop any attempt. Usually they break in when you aren't there. Tazers, pepper spray and baseball bats are effective, and you don't have to keep them locked up and unloaded for safety.

Really--how do you see your gun as protection--what scenario?

----

Guy pulls a knife, you pull a gun.

Posted by Pirate at 2008-07-01 12:28 PM | Reply |

Guy pulls a gun first--takes your gun.

I would say any criminal that tries to hold someone up with a knife is a fool, but if he has a knife and you make a move, you could be sliced pretty bad and there's no guarantee you shoot him or don't have the gun used on you. No guarantee the bullet won't go through him and kill someone else.

I'd rather have a car antennae than a gun in that situation. Even a rock or a club.

Thinking you will be the only one with a gun is wishful thinking.

Doesn't everyone keep a rock or a stick in the nightstand?

Bob,
You're a punk and a dummy.

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2008-07-01 11:48 AM | Reply

pffft

"you seen malcomn x

if malcomns father shot the kkk in the back of the head like this texas guy did

then they wouldn't have come back to murder him later"

Posted by klifferd at 2008-07-01 11:46 AM | Reply

If nobody had guns, nobody would have gotten shot.

Can't outsmart a snake? What a surprise. Wasted a bullet when a good rock or stick would have done the same thing. You're very brave and macho.

hey how bout my neighbor sniping the dude from his yard while i'm being held at gunpoint in my garage

Posted by klifferd at 2008-07-01 11:33 AM | Reply

Assumng your neighbor can see you and would rather take a chance of shooting you instead of calling the police--it doesn't address how YOUR gun is for protection.

Your captor could still kill you with his dying breath--or the shot could make him shoot you through reflex action--or your neighbors shot could hit you--or he could just wound your captor and he kills you--or he could miss everything and your captor kills you.

Really--how do you see your gun as protection--what scenario?

Take away the meens to defend onself and the scum take what they want when they want. simple as that, now what part of this dont you understand.

Posted by GenSherman at 2008-07-01 11:22 AM | Reply

Explain to me the scenario where a guns saves you when a guy pulls his gun on you from your garage to your house?

What scenario do you see a gun as protection?

Katieberry

You should learn from this guy if he is your hero. Your body count could be three by now.

An ADT alarm system keeps bad guys away. What a surprise. I guess the break ins are better than paying $25.00 a month fee.

People who think a gun will protect them are stupid beyond belief.

The stories in this thread are not shown as anywhere near self defense. Even Zatoichis scenario was one of cold blooded murder.

Facts are, there is only one scenario where a gun can protect you from a bad guy.

That one scenario is if the bad guy makes enough noise and gives you enough time to get to your weapon. Any other scenario leaves you with your deer rifle stuck up your ass with a distress flag attached.

You can answer the door with a gun in your hand and still not be able to protect yourself if someone wants you dead.

I would think any burglar in Texas would shoot first in the future. They should take this lesson to heart. Don't do it unless you are prepared to shoot first.

But then, that should be true anyplace. Only truly stupid burglars would go into a house unarmed. Lots of times they break in to get guns. Just a little irony.

"Liar. You don't have an ipod or a wii, just some feigned outrage at a guy who had the balls to nail a couple of career criminals who violated the law when they entered this country illegally - one of whom had already been deported for cocaine trafficking. The real shame goes to the assholes who harassed this guy by mobbing his house and trying to make him feel guilty."

Posted by OzarkAggie at 2008-06-30 11:59 PM | Reply

Only a coward like yourself would think it takes "balls" to shoot two unarmed men in the back as they ran away. This guy is as guily as OJ, and is free for the same reasons.

The laws these men violated were not death penalty laws. I would bet you are pro-life too. Got Jesus on your side?

;-)

The headline is full of racial bigotry and hate.
Just--like--you.

That is probably the worst headline I've ever seen on the DR. It clearly shows the hate in the heart of conservatives. I bet he loves jesus though--fear is a strong incentive for worship.

Why are dumbfucks buying stuff in Chicago? Ever heard of the internet? How about a drive to another county? If you pay 10% sales tax--you are stupid, so STFU and pay up if you can't figure a way around it.

I wonder why Obama didn't mention this during the primaries? Obama is crazy if he thinks his supporters liked the faith based bullshit of Bush. If we wanted Bush programs expanded, we would have voted for McCain.

Let's hope we don't have two McCains on our hands here.

Someguy2 still thinks kerry hasn't released his medical records. He lives in his own world and reality need not apply. Talking reality to him makes as much sense as talking reality to a cat. They both think what they want and nothing you say will change a thing.

Your last comment--Yeah--they said the same thing about Reagan too.

Posted by MURPHY at 2008-06-30 11:16 PM | Reply

And they were correct. Fortunately, Reagan was just a puppet President. A mouthpiece for his handlers. Reagan had Alzheimers during his first term, that's why he couldn't stay awake during cabinet meetings. He could still make speeches---but think---no. When he said he couldn't remember 200 times in his testimony, he wasn't lying. I doubt he even knew he was in court later on in the day.

I'd have thought the one about swiftboats not going into Cambodia is an obvious example.

Posted by Zed at 2008-06-30 11:38 PM | Reply

I think Kerrys statement about Christams Eve in Cambodia is entirely plausible. I was in Nam working in intelligence, and knew we were bombing in Cambodia three months before Congress knew about it. Kerry could very easily have been part of that program.

I guess the burglars in Texas better arm themselves. Breaking into someone house without a gun is stupid. I would imagine the next guys will shoot back instead of allowing themselves to be shot down in cold blood like dogs.

If this guy were my neighbor, I would treat him like the nut case murderer he is. Every day when I came home I would still remember where the bodies were laying on my street. I'd rather collect on my insurance for my stolen property than have those kinds of memories. I would not enjoy my home knowing my neighbor killed two people to protect my fucking ipod and wii.

Could Kerry prove false a single one of the many charges the 527 group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth made in their advertising against him in the 2004 election? That question has been left on the table since last November."

Start at that point and read on.

Posted by SomeGuy2 at 2008-06-30 11:11 PM | Reply

Why should I start at that point and move on? That point is erroneous. The Swiftboaters have been proven liars on every charge they made. There is no doubt--there is no question. They talked to the Vietnamese who were on the other side that day. They knew the guy Kerry killed with the RPG--they substantiate his version. The man Kerry pulled from the water substantiated Kerrys version. The medals awarded to his accusers on that day substantiated Kerrys version. The Navy reviewed the action, and substantiated Kerrys version.

Your link does nothing to dispel Kerrys verson. Your link does not deal with the Swiftboater lies at all.

They weren't disproven. Sorry. www.huffingtonpost.com

Posted by SomeGuy2 at 2008-06-30 10:52 PM | Reply

Your link has nothing to do with Swift Boaters for Lies allegations. Do you even know who the Swift Boaters were and what they said? It doesn't seem like it.

Which allegations were disproven?

Posted by SomeGuy2 at 2008-06-30 10:42 PM |

Do you understand the concept of "ALL".

The criticism of Obama is for his lack of experience and judgement.

Posted by MURPHY at 2008-06-30 10:35 PM | Reply

Obama was against the Iraq conflict from the start. Obama is against the Iraq conflict now. McCain supported the Iraq conflict from the beginning. McCain supports the Iraq conflict now.

The lack of judgement is shown by McCain--and you.

McVeigh more then likely was a liberal. Plus I'm talking about the thousands of dirt bag professional students which almost destroyed this county. Now there in the university teaching bone heads like you to become liberals.

Posted by ozzieoswald at 2008-06-30 07:17 PM | Reply

I doubt there are many liberals in the Michigan Militia. I guess you never wondered why most university people have liberal thoughts. Liberal thinking comes with education. Education teaches--among other things--how to think in clear and logical sequence. People without education seem to think that those with educations are stupid. Go figure. People like yourself, with no education, think you know more than people with education. How about that. Its like magic to you isn't it. You seem to think that people are born with all knowledge, and the more books people read--the more they study--the dumber they get. You are mistaken. The more you read--the more you know.

This country was founded by liberals and liberal thought. Freedom is a liberal concept--not a conservative concept. Slavery is a conservative concept--not a liberal concept.

Has the Swift Boater's allegations been disproven?

Posted by SomeGuy2 at 2008-06-30 10:00 PM | Reply

Yes. All of them. Too bad you didn't know that yourself.

Goes to show how many people just read the headlines.

BUFFALO BOB: "You Funny" (New intelligent liberal response when you hit them with the facts)

Posted by ozzieoswald at 2008-06-30 08:55 AM | Reply

So is Obama a radical Muslim or is Obama a radical Christian who attended a militant Christian church with a radical Christian pastor for the last 20 years?

You funny.

and stooooooooooooopid.

;-)

Clevey

You funny.

;-)

"It means telling the truth about a public figure, it means "speaking truth to power". Kerry never did disprove anything they said about him. Here we are four years later, and he still hasn't released his military records."

Posted by clevey at 2008-06-30 08:32 AM | Reply

Where have you been? In a cave?

I agree that they have only themselves to blame. They saw a fellow swiftboater being unfairly attacked day after day and did nothing. Said nothing. Stood for nothing. Now when the slime starts to affect them---NOW they are concerned.

Goatman

I saw the picture of your grand daughter, and you really seemed to care about her future.

It seems I was mistaken. It seems I care more about her future than you. Go figure.

How could the majority of Dems NOT stop the Iraq War??? Because they lie to you and YOU believe them. They never intended to do such a thing, and now you cry that McCain demanded transferability and WON.

Posted by SomeGuy2 at 2008-06-29 11:50 PM

There is no majority of dems. Lieberman is an independant, and he favors the unnecessary killing of innocent humans for absolutely no reason other than he is a pants pissing coward just like you.

There are many members of the tolerant, all inclusive party who will tolerate and include you only if you agree with them. What an irony.

Posted by goatman at 2008-06-29 02:47 PM |

The dems never claimed to be all inclusive--it is the republicans who claim the broad umbrella. The rainbow coalition was one candidate--not the dem party. I would say that liberals are tolerant of anything except intolerance. No room in liberal thinking for intolerant people---like the people who are harrassing Nanc---or Nanc. Ya gotta be tolerant to be a liberal. Ya gotta hate intolerance if you are a liberal. Just like ya gotta hate Satan if you are a christian--ya gotta hate intolerance if you are a liberal.

I would say that anyone who is that concerned with Nanc posting here is truly a person without a life. I hope they don't consider themselves a liberal while trying to restrict someones right to Free Speech.

However, I would expect weirdos wherever I go and would not leave any contact info around for them to utilize.

mwmfatherof4

mwmfatherof4

Do you think you won? War--countries bailing out on the dollar--economy in the shitter--4.00 gas. Was that your goal?

Blt

It is obvious Bush doesn't put America first, and neither do you.

Obama couldn't be any worse--at least he isn't buddies with the bin Ladens. At least the bin Ladens didn't bail him out of a business problem. HW Bush was having a meeting with a bin Laden family member on the morning of 9/10.

"and you guys still cant get over 2000......what a bunch of knuckleheads........."

Posted by bushlovertwo at 2008-06-29 01:02 AM | Reply

The thousands who have died in Iraq since 2000 can't seem to get over it either. They are the real losers in that election. All I have to worry about is $5.00 gas and paying more taxes than the rich. Probably the only campaign promise W has kept---too bad he made the promise to oil companies and his rich buddies.

I think Obama puts America first--very refreshing.

Why am I the first to see this? Why haven't I heard about this on the news, morning, noon, and night?

"Unless Barr gains some serious traction, there is a very good possibility that not only will Obama win, he'll win with over 50% of the general vote. Something Bill never was able to do. If Obama gets 50.2% of the vote (beating Carter 76), he'll have done better than every Dem nominee since FDR, save Johnson (less than a year after the Kennedy assassination).

Gotta chap the old jackass' hide."

Posted by lawnchair at 2008-06-29 12:05 AM | Reply

Yeah--you must think we live in a democracy. We don't. Popular vote means NOTHING. Electoral votes means EVERYTHING. If you want to live in a democracy--move to Iraq.

Clinton won BIG in 1992.

CLINTON---370 Electoral Votes.

HW Bush--168 Electoral Votes

Clinton won even BIGGER in 1996.

Clinton---379 Electoral Votes

Dole---159 Electoral Votes.

"At the time the rules were established, there WAS no someone else - she was the prohibitive favorite. And most of the rules and processes were designed and implemented by the Clinton faithful of the party."

Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2008-06-28 11:36 PM

link? It makes no difference who made up the rules--they have been in place long before Clinton was a blip on the rad3ar in 1992. The dem primary has never benn held like the general election, or like the republican primary. The dem primary gives too much weight to the red states, and Obama is the red state candidate--not the blue state candidate. That's why this election is so close. ALL indicators pointed toward Clinton as the strongest candidate---ALL INDICATORS---except the flawed dem primary.

Again, I am very happy with Obama as candidate. It is the rest of the country that has doubts. Those doubts were not shown by Clinton supporters, and Clinton was still far ahead of where Obama shows now in the polls.

You could save your self by at least admitting when Obama screws up. Otherwise it makes you look ridiculous.

Posted by MURPHY at 2008-06-28 05:55 PM | Reply

When you can admit McCain screw ups, you will have a point.

When you can admit republican screw ups you will have a point.

Zombies like yourself never admit to republican misatakes.

The republican smear machine deserves no quarter, and no fucking respect. The 527s aren't limited by how much they spend, and neither should Obama. He made an agreement and broke it? How many times has McCain said something and gone back on what he said?

Here is a clue. See if you can get it.

IT'S THE WORD OF GOD MAN!!!! ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY GOD IS WRONG??!?!?!?!

Posted by jpw at 2008-06-28 04:19 AM

Who says it is the word of God? The stories of the bible are stolen stories from older, discarded religions. Genesis--the Garden of Eden--Adam and Eve--the Flood--the Tower of Babel----all stolen from older religions and the older stories make more sense.

The bible is not the Word of God. It is the word of older, discarded religions repackaged for a different power base.

Ozarkpussy

Big sport. Hunt a bear with a butter knife, and that's a sport. Hunting bunnies with AK47s is not sport, no matter how much your dick sucking buddies claim it to be.

The Heartland is in Pennsylvania and the EAST--that's where this country was founded. Your part of the country was founded by butchers who killed women and children for their land and called themselves Hero.

Oh, but you did, many months months ago. Same subject. I remember that clearly because after arguing that the 2nd only authorized the militia, I challenged you to file a case, even offered to help you, and you said you wouldn't do that because you owned firearms.

You're fucking liar. You are the lowest piece of slime here or anywhere on the net. Even Jackass stands on your head.

So hang yourself.

Posted by OzarkAggie at 2008-06-28 12:01 AM | Reply

You are a liar and a punk. I said I wouldn't file because I support the right to bear arms. I'm not stupid enough to have a gun in the house. Are you?

You sound like a Christian.