It's a well known fact that the explosive power of car bombs are neutralized by the presence of a side arm and adequate patriotism.No and I'm guessing if you asked the recent terror victims in France, they would probably have said no, as well. I will say, that in me, they'd have a fight on their hands since I'm usually armed.
It's a well known fact that the explosive power of car bombs are neutralized by the presence of a side arm and adequate patriotism.
I meant "car bomb" in the way they've been used to attack and kill crowds of people, not just the ones that make appearances in gangster movies.I think I'd be flattered (and splattered) if someone cared enought about me personally to rig my car with a bomb. I admit that I don't have an answer for every potential threat, but in an active shooter situation, I'm just saying that the bad guy would not be the only one armed.
It's a well known fact that the explosive power of car bombs are neutralized by the presence of a side arm and adequate patriotism.
No, i am not - then again i'm not thrilled about dying anytime soon, any way, period.
I meant "car bomb" in the way they've been used to attack and kill crowds of people, not just the ones that make appearances in gangster movies.
Car bomb attacks kill 37 people in Iraq
I agree with minimizing threats, just seems premature to feel safe because you may have partially addressed one aspect of one threat under ideal circumstances.Ah, well like I say, you could come up with all manner of threats that I wouldn't have an immediate answer for, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to not minimize risks where I can.
I agree with minimizing threats, just seems premature to feel safe because you may have partially addressed one aspect of one threat under ideal circumstances.
Regardless, terrorists aren't going to kill me, odds say I'm fart more likely to die from heart disease, cancer, or stroke.
It's a well known fact that the explosive power of car bombs are neutralized by the presence of a side arm and adequate patriotism.
A bomb is going to win against whatever you're armed with, assuming it's not adequately blast plated.That really isn't the issue though. Who is more likely to be victimized as a general rule? Someone who is known to be unarmed, or someone who is believed likely to be armed?
A bomb is going to win against whatever you're armed with, assuming it's not adequately blast plated.
Someone who has the will and the resources will find the means to kill people. The sensible strategy is to limit the resources and limit the will of those who would wish to kill you.Yes, I realize that, but it's still not what I was getting at.
A bomb is going to win against whatever you're armed with, assuming it's not adequately blast plated.
The emphasis on prevention seems to be seeing, not so much the being armed part. Being vigilant is the real value not being a vigilante.well if I see some scumbag planting a bomb and give him a mozambiquing, I win
http://i.imgur.com/JubgE.png
I'll see if I can find an image that cleverly explains that not all people killed by police robbed convenience stores before attacking law enforcement.Maybe - just maybe - you shouldn't attack police officers after robbing convenience stores?