• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

pharmacist shoots and kills potential assasin and robber

tech30528 said:
I'm thinking if you have the opportunity to stop a crime in progress you take a moment to ask the would be victim who they voted for. If they answer it wrong, well, just reholster and walk away. 911 will surely be there in time.
Click to expand...

well if they have an Obama shirt on you let the thug waste them and then waste the criminal:mrgreen: saying you were just a little slow. probably two less anti gun voters for the next election!
 
The Giant Noodle said:
Connecticut shooter used heavy-duty weapons registered to his mother to kill her and 25 others - NY Daily News
Click to expand...
Taken from your cited link...

The two pistols were found inside the school and a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle was found in the back of his mother's car in the parking lot.

"The damage these weapons can do is just horrific," firearms expert Ronald Scott said. All three are highly lethal weapons manufactured for combat and to stop criminals"


Yep...those 'heavy duty weapons (WTF is a 'heavy duty weapon' exactly?) are 'handguns'...chambered in a lower caliber than the ones in the OP and of which you were singing its praise.

Brilliant. Juuuuuuuuust brilliant.
 
TurtleDude said:
well if they have an Obama shirt on you let the thug waste them and then waste the criminal:mrgreen: saying you were just a little slow. probably two less anti gun voters for the next election!
Click to expand...

I'm thinking it would have been too difficult to figure out which one was the criminal. One of them is trying to steal something they didn't earn from someone who did and the other is a mugger.
 
tech30528 said:
I'm thinking it would have been too difficult to figure out which one was the criminal. One of them is trying to steal something they didn't earn from someone who did and the other is a mugger.
Click to expand...

well maybe the solution is to kill em all and let the coroner sort them out?:mrgreen:
 
jamesrage said:
The article is is wrong. A AR-15 is not an assault rifle.It does not have have burst or automatic fire capability. Our military does not use AR15s.Our Military uses M-16s. The author of the article just like a lot of anti-2nd amendment crackpots are totally ignorant when it comes to firearms.
Click to expand...

Im all for the 2nd amendment. Like I said I think almost everyone should carry a firearm. Just not all of them because they arent needed for civilians. Do I have a lot of passion for this topic? Not really. No where near getting rid of illegals and firing any teachers in a State union that goes on strike plus getting rid of all State pensions so they pay into SS. Hey if you guys want your spiffy guns and huge magazines... fine. But I dont think you need them. I think they are just like stuffed animals to a kid. They comfort you.
 
Last edited:
The Giant Noodle said:
Im all for the 2nd amendment. Like I said I think almost everyone should carry a firearm. Just not all of them
Click to expand...
Thats like saying Im all for the first amendment but I just think certain religions,news channels, ,magazines, certain protest groups and etc should be banned. People who are for the 2nd amendment do not utter the nonsense you are uttering.

because they arent needed for civilians.
Click to expand...

1.Again a AR15 is not a military weapon.

2.If police have them then regular civilians most certainly need them.Regular civilians are the main targets of criminals, not civilian law enforcement.

3.The 2nd amendment doesn't exist for hunting and fending off criminals.It exists so that the people have the means to defend this country against invasions and to deter and or remove a tyrannical government, IE the necessary to the security of a free State. When our founding forefathers wrote the 2nd amendment they didn't say "Oh since the police and military have muskets then the only weapons regular civilians should be allowed to own are bows and arrows,clubs and bladed weapons".
 
jamesrage said:
Thats like saying Im all for the first amendment but I just think certain religions,news channels, ,magazines, certain protest groups and etc should be banned. People who are for the 2nd amendment do not utter the nonsense you are uttering.



1.Again a AR15 is not a military weapon.

2.If police have them then regular civilians most certainly need them.Regular civilians are the main targets of criminals, not civilian law enforcement.

3.The 2nd amendment doesn't exist for hunting and fending off criminals.It exists so that the people have the means to defend this country against invasions and to deter and or remove a tyrannical government, IE the necessary to the security of a free State. When our founding forefathers wrote the 2nd amendment they didn't say "Oh since the police and military have muskets then the only weapons regular civilians should be allowed to own are bows and arrows,clubs and bladed weapons".
Click to expand...

If thats what you think, ok. :shrug: Im not going to convince you otherwise.
Regarding the AR15 they fire 800 rounds PER minute. Thats a lot man. AR-15 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The Giant Noodle said:
He did it without
carrying a 30 clip assault riffle. I feel
almost everyone should be carrying a ranged
weapon (especially in World of Warcraft). Just not something with a huge clip capacity if youre a civilian. A 1911 is perfect. Want lots of bullets then carry lots of clips.
Click to expand...

Idiocy.....unbelievable.

Yea clips, that all you clowns want to limit.

You libs have picked a fight with a few millions gun owners and you shamelessly use the death of 28 innocent people to push your Narrative.
Real smart.

Gun clips is just your way to start draconian regulations that limit our second ammendment.

Disconnect from that useless game and learn something.
 
The Giant Noodle said:
If thats what you think,
Click to expand...
Its not a matter of what I think.A AR15 is not assault rifle because it does not have burst or automatic selective rate of fire. The only people calling an AR-15 and assault rifle are idiots who are totally clueless about firearms.

ok. :shrug: Im not going to convince you otherwise.
Regarding the AR15 they fire 800 rounds PER minute. Thats a lot man. AR-15 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

A AR15 is not a automatic rifle, it doesn't even have burst.So it doesn't matter if its rate of fire is 20 rounds a minute or billion rounds a minute.A round will only fire for each trigger squeeze.Unless you are superman or the Flash you are not going to squeeze the trigger 800 times in a minute.If you don't believe me then pick up a firearm,repeatedly squeeze the trigger for a minute, and while you are doing that change the magazine out after ever 20-30 trigger squeezes and count how many times you squeezed the trigger.
 
Last edited:
Fenton said:
Idiocy.....unbelievable.

Yea clips, that all you clowns want to limit.

You libs have picked a fight with a few millions gun owners and you shamelessly use the death of 28 innocent people to push your Narrative.
Real smart.

Gun clips is just your way to start draconian regulations that limit our second ammendment.

Disconnect from that useless game and learn something.
Click to expand...

First, Im independant.
Second, you speak like mad child on a playground when an adult took your ball away because you dont know the proper way to play.
Now go turn something like Hannity on that makes you unplug from reality where you can suck your far right conservative thumb.
Good day to you sir :bootyshake
 
Ok, and today in the news from around my house 3 drunk rednecks thought that someone was sneaking around their house and shot multiple rounds killing nothing but air and perhaps some unlucky woodland creatures and trees. The one rare time it becomes useful does not equal all the other useless times idiots with guns use them. Oh, and let us not forget the reason that the pharmacist had to shoot it out. That would again be idiots with guns. Now perhaps limiting access idiots have to guns might lower the need for shootouts with idiots with guns? Or we could do what the gun nuts want and give more idiots easier access to guns. Yeah, that will solve the problem sort of like a match will solve the problem of a giant gasoline spill in your house.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Son, I served 7 years in the Army. The last 3 with 5th SF. You can kiss my ass. I'm the guy that says "boo" and you crap all over yourself.
Click to expand...
I have a buddy who ran into a few SF forces on base when he was in the service. He said you could drop those guys off in the arctic with a knife and boxer shorts and they would come back to you wearing a polar bear coat.:mrgreen:
 
jamesrage said:
The article is is wrong. A AR-15 is not an assault rifle.It does not have have burst or automatic fire capability. Our military does not use AR15s.Our Military uses M-16s. The author of the article just like a lot of anti-2nd amendment crackpots are totally ignorant when it comes to firearms.
Click to expand...
But he is a journalist, so he MUST know more than the rest of us what he's talking about. :lol: That reminds me of the Obamacare pre-passage debates I was having with supporters here, my information came from professional experience, theirs came from either third rate blogs or biased journalism entries, I was right...............SHOCKING I know.
 
Maroon.[/QUOTE]

Look you, I think you meant "moron." Maroon is a nice reddish colour.

And why do you write the way you do? I sense anger coupled with not wanting to hear the other side.
 
The Giant Noodle said:
First, Im independant.
Second, you speak like mad child on a playground when an adult took your ball away because you dont know the proper way to play.
Now go turn something like Hannity on that makes you unplug from reality where you can suck your far right conservative thumb.
Good day to you sir :bootyshake
Click to expand...

With bait posts like this, I dont think you have a firm grasp on what an adult post would look like.

An unmodified AR-15 is not shooting 800 rounds per minute--if you are going to lie, at least make it believable.
 
The Giant Noodle said:
He did it without carrying a 30 clip assault riffle. I feel almost everyone should be carrying a ranged weapon (especially in World of Warcraft). Just not something with a huge clip capacity if youre a civilian. A 1911 is perfect. Want lots of bullets then carry lots of clips.
Click to expand...

In the "good olé days' a gun held one shot and you had to get a second shot off after pouring gun powder down the barrel, inserting a wad then a bullet and finally ramming it all into the bottom of the barrel in order to make a shoot able projectile. Then pre made bullets were invented which greatly increased the rate of fire. Then the six shooter pistol and rifles with magazines up to nine rounds were invented which again greatly increased firepower. Finally we now have large capacity magazines which again increases firepower. Exactly how far back in history do you want to go to make guns less lethal? If we could only own muzzle loaders just think how many lives would be saved. :roll:
 
Good story!

Why didn't I see it on NBC or other MSM?
 
The Giant Noodle said:
If thats what you think, ok. :shrug: Im not going to convince you otherwise.
Regarding the AR15 they fire 800 rounds PER minute. Thats a lot man. AR-15 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Ah, no. The mechanism may be capable of firing 800 rounds a minute based on the time it takes to cycle a single round, but there is absolutely no way a person is going to fire 800 rounds per minute out of a semi auto. Michael J Fox's trigger finger in full seizure can't twitch that fast for that long, let alone mag changes. And if you create a device that is capable of doing it you have created a full auto rifle which is HIGHLY illegal and will land you in federal prison for a long long time. The only way you are going to send that many rounds downrange that fast is with a full auto belt fed rifle, something like a SAW which is heavy, tripod mounted and takes two people to operate. BTW our military has those. They are used for cover fire mostly since accuracy at that firing rate is not so good. But they are operated by soldiers, most of which are boys barely out of high school who do occasionally snap too. Just because they wear a uniform doesn't make them any more stable than anybody else.
 
LaMidRighter said:
But he is a journalist, so he MUST know more than the rest of us what he's talking about. :lol: That reminds me of the Obamacare pre-passage debates I was having with supporters here, my information came from professional experience, theirs came from either third rate blogs or biased journalism entries, I was right...............SHOCKING I know.
Click to expand...

Yes, I remember the blind faith then too. "You will be able to keep your doctor". Not so much. "premiums will drop". Didn't happen. In fact they have already increased by 30% on average and will be going up more. So coverage costs more and doctors are making less, where do they suppose the money is going?

Then there was the new tax law. "Only the top 2% will pay more". Remember that? Anybody looked at their paycheck yet this year? My suggestion is to not pick up the soap in the shower with a trusted politician.
 
Last edited:
tererun said:
Ok, and today in the news from around my house 3 drunk rednecks thought that someone was sneaking around their house and shot multiple rounds killing nothing but air and perhaps some unlucky woodland creatures and trees. The one rare time it becomes useful does not equal all the other useless times idiots with guns use them. Oh, and let us not forget the reason that the pharmacist had to shoot it out. That would again be idiots with guns. Now perhaps limiting access idiots have to guns might lower the need for shootouts with idiots with guns? Or we could do what the gun nuts want and give more idiots easier access to guns. Yeah, that will solve the problem sort of like a match will solve the problem of a giant gasoline spill in your house.
Click to expand...
You have already been presented with evidence that the actual use of privately held firearms to prevent crimes ranges from 700,000 to 3.6 million times per year based on research, surveys, and FBI crime statistics (evidence which you conveniently ignored and failed to counter). No...far easier to ignore the facts and spew opinion and rhetoric.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Hey Sherlock. The 2nd Amendment say "uninfringed". But back to the point, how about you are a business owner, being robbed, and you only have 8 shots. The bad guys got twice that. At least you can die in accordance with the law ?

You make me sick. Twice. You clearly have no clue about the 2nd Amendment, and the intent of the Founders.

Maroon.
Click to expand...

It says uninfringed HOWEVER it has been and will continue to be restricted and it is all legal. You illinformed 2nd A ranters make me sick- see what I did there?

I can say this about how many shots it takes, if you don't aim you can't miss fast enough. If you aim true the other guy dies with a bunch of rounds in his weapon. if you worry about what he has you are already behind the curve, concentrate on using what you got as well as you can. :roll:

Like inches, it doesn't matter how many you have but how you use them. having a bunch of either just leads to sloppy work and lazy efforts. :peace
 
notquiteright said:
It says uninfringed HOWEVER it has been and will continue to be restricted and it is all legal. You illinformed 2nd A ranters make me sick- see what I did there?

I can say this about how many shots it takes, if you don't aim you can't miss fast enough. If you aim true the other guy dies with a bunch of rounds in his weapon. if you worry about what he has you are already behind the curve, concentrate on using what you got as well as you can. :roll:

Like inches, it doesn't matter how many you have but how you use them. having a bunch of either just leads to sloppy work and lazy efforts. :peace
Click to expand...

Cool. So when multiple intruders show up with ILLEGAL weapons and I'm in compliance with less effective and lower capacity weapons I'll just call "time out" so I can reload right? Because criminals are really good about playing by the rules. It's like the high school kid who thinks a fight is over when somebody falls down as if there is a ref in real life, and is then surprised when he continues to get his a$$ kicked on the ground. Seen that a bunch of times. Reality is not the blissful utopia the sheltered think it is.
 
tererun said:
Ok, and today in the news from around my house 3 drunk rednecks thought that someone was sneaking around their house and shot multiple rounds killing nothing but air and perhaps some unlucky woodland creatures and trees. The one rare time it becomes useful does not equal all the other useless times idiots with guns use them. Oh, and let us not forget the reason that the pharmacist had to shoot it out. That would again be idiots with guns. Now perhaps limiting access idiots have to guns might lower the need for shootouts with idiots with guns? Or we could do what the gun nuts want and give more idiots easier access to guns. Yeah, that will solve the problem sort of like a match will solve the problem of a giant gasoline spill in your house.
Click to expand...


So, let's pass a law against idiots.

If should be about as easy to enforce as a law against guns.

But, aren't full auto rifles already illegal? Why do we need another law?
 
tech30528 said:
Cool. So when multiple intruders show up with ILLEGAL weapons and I'm in compliance with less effective and lower capacity weapons I'll just call "time out" so I can reload right? Because criminals are really good about playing by the rules. It's like the high school kid who thinks a fight is over when somebody falls down as if there is a ref in real life, and is then surprised when he continues to get his a$$ kicked on the ground. Seen that a bunch of times. Reality is not the blissful utopia the sheltered think it is.
Click to expand...

So your experience is in high school fights and you wish to apply that 'experience' to the use of deadly force?

lets think on the less rounds in the weapon thing for justa moment.

How many rounds in most concealed carry pistols-
remember they are subcompacts so they can be concealed.

If you think you need a whole bunch of rounds to defend yourself you are going to lose. Blasting away isn't going to get them all before one of them gets you. If you think you can out gun three well armed and shooting bad guys without taking a hit yourself you are in for a very sad awakening.

You can try and dream up scenarios and try to make it out to show a single man against three well armed and already shooting badguys will prevail if only he had a high cap mag...

But you would be incorrect. :peace
 
Dittohead not! said:
So, let's pass a law against idiots.

If should be about as easy to enforce as a law against guns.

But, aren't full auto rifles already illegal? Why do we need another law?
Click to expand...

If we did that at least half the country would be breaking the law by being idiots. Same thing with banning firearms. If you change the laws you make legal gun owners criminals retroactively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom