Another victim WITHOUT a gun.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

How you feel you know people who carry are paranoid is beyond me.

It's a lot easier to be objective about a subject if you're not emotionally involved with it.

And you are looking in a miror when you posted this, correct?

Gee Rush, why not just use "I'm rubber, you're glue" taunt from 1st grade? Good god, how lame.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

How you feel you know people who carry are paranoid is beyond me.

It's a lot easier to be objective about a subject if you're not emotionally involved with it.

And you are looking in a miror when you posted this, correct?

Gee Rush, why not just use "I'm rubber, you're glue" taunt from 1st grade? Good god, how lame.

Truth hurt?

Look, your post indicates that you (or your side) is the only one that can look at this objectivly while those that do not agree with you, can not. It that being objective or arogant?

Talk about first grade.

To use your own quote from last night

"Think for a second"

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 2]

I know you are but what am I

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I know you are but what am I

Answer this the way it should be answered may get me banned.

I will pass

So, anything constructive to post?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

A third grader has rubbed off on you yet again

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

was he waiting to kill her? what was his purpose??

"Lay in wait" was quoted from the article.

Let's assume there is a 50/50 chance the article is correct. In one case, there is absolutely NOTHING her being armed would have done to prevent her being shot. In the other case, there is a chance she might have prevented it.

It's absolutely not a good argument for being armed. Like I said previously, it's a much better argument for stricter gun control on those with restraining orders against them.

Total BS. YOUR unarmed scenario denies her of ANY opportunity of saving her life.
Her having the weapon would justify your 50/50 proposition and maybe even improve the odds.

And on top of that, you seem pretty confident that restrictions of any sort will prevent this type of situation.

And on top of that, you assume that a news article's "lay in wait" means hiding in the bushes or some such ambush thing.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

You're not making sense today. Take a break, eh?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

How you feel you know people who carry are paranoid is beyond me.

It's a lot easier to be objective about a subject if you're not emotionally involved with it.

But you're not projecting, no....

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 4]

Quote

Total BS. YOUR unarmed scenario denies her of ANY opportunity of saving her life.

Nope. Never said that. What I said was that it made for a poor case in favor of and just doesn't justify panicking about it on a daily basis.

Quote

Her having the weapon would justify your 50/50 proposition and maybe even improve the odds.

Having a Cypres improves your odds a hell of a lot more yet I know lot of people that don't jump with them for various reasons.

Quote

And on top of that, you seem pretty confident that restrictions of any sort will prevent this type of situation.

Never said that. Just said this wasn't a good case that justified carrying a weapon.

Quote

And on top of that, you assume that a news article's "lay in wait" means hiding in the bushes or some such ambush thing.

There's simply no other way to interpret the phrase. None. "Lay in wait" means something completely different than, for instance, "greeted with a box of cookies".

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Quote

You're not making sense today. Take a break, eh?

Are you emotionaly attached to this subject???

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Her having the weapon would justify your 50/50 proposition and maybe even improve the odds.

Having a Cypres improves your odds a hell of a lot more yet I know lot of people that don't jump with them for various reasons.

What's the ratio of cypres saves to owners? It's a heck of a lot lower than 50%. What's your math behind this statement?

If the scenario is - likes to jump blindfolded and handcuffed, yeah, the cypres (coupled with a large reserve) would be a very good tool for non paranoid jumpers.

Likewise, if I were a woman with a restraining order against a stalker, I'd sure as hell want to be carrying. The alternative is to just get killed. And even in your unrealistic belief that laws would prevent him from getting a gun, he could still lay in wait with a bat and beat her to death - where her having a gun would really pay off.

If you ever run for office, the wife beaters and rapists will support your candidacy.

Quote

There's simply no other way to interpret the phrase. None. "Lay in wait" means something completely different than, for instance, "greeted with a box of cookies".

In a newspaper article? Isn't that like "his parachute failed to open." We know how accurate that description is. You can't [honestly] draw any conclusions from that and what it would mean for her ability to defend herself. The fact is that more people survive gun shot wounds than die of them.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

How you feel you know people who carry are paranoid is beyond me.

It's a lot easier to be objective about a subject if you're not emotionally involved with it.

Or perhaps the paranoia is the onus of those who would disarm everyone else... fearing they might be the victim of someone with a gun. The trouble is.... only those who might protect you will lose thier weapons.. not the weapons that your victimizer will use on you.

Its a lot easier to be subjective about a subject if you are indeed emotionally involved in a false premise.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I know you are but what am I

I've read the whole thread and I'm very disappointed that we aren't discussing the REAL issue.

We need to outlaw down filled pillows and boxes of cookies that lie in wait.




for the children

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Oh, so it's not a problem when it's one death. Where is the tipping point?

Ok, how about another nutter with a car. Ready to give up the MG?

Yet ANOTHER strawman.

First, I haven't ever suggested a blanket gun ban. Rushmc embarrassed himself with the same suggestion just a week ago.

Next, MGs (and all other "weapons" combined including knives, fists, cars, airplanes, down filled pillows, etc.) are used in only half as many homicides as guns.

Start by fixing the biggest problem. Don't sweat the small stuff.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

"lay in wait and fatally shot the woman as she arrived"

You're assuming she could have done anything about it. Pretty big assumption. I'm fairly certain if I were to "lay in wait" to kill somebody (ambush them), they'd have no chance whatsoever to use their gun.

In this particular case I think it's actually a much stronger argument for tighter gun control over those that have restraining orders placed on them.

In this day and age "BE AWARE OF YOUR SURROUNDINGS" You are correct on one pt. tho. IF (FOR WHATEVER REASON) I wanted to kill you you'd never see it coming.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Next, MGs (and all other cars combined) are used in far fewer homicides than guns.

Start by fixing the biggest problem. Don't sweat the small stuff.

You don't consider vehicular homicide, apparently. ~12000 killed due to drunk driving in 2008. Not exactly small stuff.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Next, MGs (and all other cars combined) are used in far fewer homicides than guns.

Start by fixing the biggest problem. Don't sweat the small stuff.

You don't consider vehicular homicide, apparently. ~12000 killed due to drunk driving in 2008. Not exactly small stuff.

According to the FBI, GUNS are used in over 2/3 of all murders in the USA. Take it up with the FBI.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Next, MGs (and all other cars combined) are used in far fewer homicides than guns.

Start by fixing the biggest problem. Don't sweat the small stuff.

You don't consider vehicular homicide, apparently. ~12000 killed due to drunk driving in 2008. Not exactly small stuff.

According to the FBI, GUNS are used in over 2/3 of all murders in the USA. Take it up with the FBI.

Take what up? I'm not contesting that fact. Just your claim that cars are used in 'far fewer homicides than guns.'

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Oh, so it's not a problem when it's one death. Where is the tipping point?

Ok, how about another nutter with a car. Ready to give up the MG?

Yet ANOTHER strawman.

First, I haven't ever suggested a blanket gun ban. Rushmc embarrassed himself with the same suggestion just a week ago.

Next, MGs (and all other "weapons" combined including knives, fists, cars, airplanes, down filled pillows, etc.) are used in only half as many homicides as guns.

Start by fixing the biggest problem. Don't sweat the small stuff.

No embarrassment here sir. While I agree that you have never said you want to ban guns you did once slip and give some proposals that would have amounted to said ban for all practical purposes. You just want to forget that

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Oh, so it's not a problem when it's one death. Where is the tipping point?

Ok, how about another nutter with a car. Ready to give up the MG?

Yet ANOTHER strawman.

First, I haven't ever suggested a blanket gun ban. Rushmc embarrassed himself with the same suggestion just a week ago.

Next, MGs (and all other "weapons" combined including knives, fists, cars, airplanes, down filled pillows, etc.) are used in only half as many homicides as guns.

Start by fixing the biggest problem. Don't sweat the small stuff.

No embarrassment here sir. While I agree that you have never said you want to ban guns you did once slip and give some proposals that would have amounted to said ban for all practical purposes. You just want to forget that

Funny that you haven't been able to find said statement of mine. Maybe you read it in your magic mirror of stupidity.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Oh, so it's not a problem when it's one death. Where is the tipping point?

Ok, how about another nutter with a car. Ready to give up the MG?

Yet ANOTHER strawman.

First, I haven't ever suggested a blanket gun ban. Rushmc embarrassed himself with the same suggestion just a week ago.

Next, MGs (and all other "weapons" combined including knives, fists, cars, airplanes, down filled pillows, etc.) are used in only half as many homicides as guns.

Start by fixing the biggest problem. Don't sweat the small stuff.

No embarrassment here sir. While I agree that you have never said you want to ban guns you did once slip and give some proposals that would have amounted to said ban for all practical purposes. You just want to forget that

Funny that you haven't been able to find said statement of mine. Maybe you read it in your magic mirror of stupidity.

Nope. I havent but, that is not surprising given the number of threads and specifically the number of posts you make on this subject.

But again, You can embarrass me by posting the specifics you have in mind to keep nutters from getting guns sir. It is just that simple

Got any? At least any you care to share again?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,111]

>You are correct on one pt. tho. IF (FOR WHATEVER REASON) I wanted to
>kill you you'd never see it coming. Wink

Nor would you see it coming if someone wanted to do the same to you. Hence the problem, and the reason that guns are not like spoons, despite some people's beliefs that they should be regulated the same.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Kallend-

I agree 100% with you that nutters and criminals should not be allowed to buy a gun. What do propose to change (laws, enforcement, etc) and how (specifically)?

Derek V

[Hooknswoop 19]

???

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

???

He doesn't 'really' have an answer, just vague platitudes about 'tightening things up'. In the meantime, he uses any incident to try to beat gun owners over the head with, while ignoring any mention of defensive uses.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706