- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
In VT and NH, they also come in plaid
I don't doubt that.
In VT and NH, they also come in plaid
Why wouldn't I? The guy isn't exactly worthy of protection.
"Sensitive areas" does not mean "govt buildings and GFZ's only"
While there does need to be limits on the definition, I think any reasonable definition would include the area around the White House.
It is killing someone, yourself is a someone or have we slipped into right wing re-definitions again?
I wondered when someone would start the hammers kill more people than my pistol crap. This isn't about ALL murders, a very ill informed 'conservative' tried to fly more 'gun' deaths in Illinois than Texas crap, PLEASE try and stay on topic, PLENTY of threads to rant about screwdrivers and broken bottles.
And we have gone down the car road before- far more cars in constant USE than firearms. A rifle in the closet isn't the same as speeding down the highway in 1.5 tons of metal at 65 mph for 3 hours a day, every day. Well not until a boy pulls the rifle out to play with and shoots his sister.
Well, you're totally wrong on that. You may like his policies or not; but he is the leader of our country. He represents all of us. He is the target for anyone who disagrees with ANY policy of our country.
Its called proper english and grammar. If I killed myself I would not be killing "someone" I would be killing "myself". If Joe Blow down the street kills themselves then they are doing just that...killing "themselves"...not "someone". You're the one applying the word wrong. 'm just applying the same logic that you and sanga are applying. Don't blame me if you find that you can't face facts. As for staying on topic...well...considering the topic of the thread is about a man that had a gun in the open and not suicides then why are you talking about suicides? Exactly...yet I don't see you hollering for more restrictions on the use of cars near as much (if any) compared to guns.
Then what to you is a "sensitive area"? Because frankly from what I can tell you're just painting a broad brush despite the judge having mentioned examples. Can you name any area that does not include gun free zones and government buildings that are "senstive areas"?
Well, you're totally wrong on that. You may like his policies or not; but he is the leader of our country. He represents all of us. He is the target for anyone who disagrees with ANY policy of our country.
Authorities charged Briggs with a carrying a pistol outside of a home or business, a felony charge.
Do you think if he was from Chicago, it would begin "An Illinois man......". Of course not. Typical media bias.
And by the way, a LOT more people die in Illinois from gun violence than Texas. And they have laws against guns.
Five more kids in Chicago died while you typed that. They're dropping like flies.
You have to subtract those that are self defense. That doesn't qualify. Look at violent crime.
Oh, and Texas has a border where the drug cartels are thicker than flies. That wildly skews the numbers.
Just look at the gun violence in Chicago alone. It's embarassing. It's like Cairo East.
Yeah... that's not even remotely true. Texas is #2 in total gun murders and is pretty far ahead of Illinois in gun murders per 100,000 people as well.
Given the fact that Americans are notorious for trying to assassinate their own presidents I think any president of the US should be protected, no matter who or what their policies are.A man having no problem at all spying on and killing American citizens is no friend of mine and he does not represent me. That isn't even scratching the surface on why Obama deserves nothing but a jail cell, but rest assured I see no reason he deserves his protection paid for by the people. When he gets around to respecting the peoples life, liberty, and property I will start to consider it, but until then there isn't much to consider. He deserves to be arrested for treason.
No point to you even pretending to have any intellectual integrity in your messages, huh?
In terms of "gun murder" rates per 100,000, Texas is not #2 whatsoever. Not in the top 10. The highest rate is DC and the greatest number is in California due to population.
Actually, if you read Erod's message - he says "a LOT more people die in Illinois from gun violence than Texas". That's not true. Texas is second to California in gun murders. It's #16 in gun murders, then again Illinois is #29. Texas beats Illinois in EVERY measurement related to gun violence except for one. That one being restrictions on gun violence. Whereas Texas scores a 5 (for least restrictive), Illinois scores a 26 (for most restrictive).
So in conclusion:
Erod doesn't know anything about Illinois crime or for that matter crime in his state.
Erod thinks his state is safer than Illinois, against all evidence to the contrary.
Erod hasn't seen a crime statistic in the last 10 year.
Erod doesn't know that despite Texas being one of the most gun happy states in the union, it has managed to get higher murder/gun murder rates than a pretty gun restrictive state like Illinois.
Nothing new really.
None of this matters to conservatives. All that matters is that they strut around talking high and mighty about themselves, their beliefs, their perceived superiority to everyone else. They will take their selfish, delusional nonsense to the grave, never realizing how their ignorance made life unnecessarily more difficult for everyone else.
Nah dude, it's not even like that. There are some pretty reasonable people on the pro-gun conservative side. Then you have your idiots who make up crazy theories like "more guns, less crime". If that were true Sub-Saharan Africa, the Muslim Middle East and Brazilian favelas would be great places to go vacation and yet, they're some of the most violent places on Earth. Mexico is full of guns and crime there is terrible. Where are the places with least crime? First countries that come to mind are Canada, Japan, Norway, Switzerland, etc with their supposedly draconian anti-gun cultures.
It's really mind boggling. Around the world you have these places where guns are a dime a dozen and they're full of crime. Then you have other places where guns are highly restricted and there is little crime. How can you begin to seriously attribute the number of guns to the level of crime? Well, if anything guns show us two things. The more there are, the more people will use them to kill each other.
No point to you even pretending to have any intellectual integrity in your messages, huh?
In terms of "gun murder" rates per 100,000, Texas is not #2 whatsoever. Not in the top 10. The highest rate is DC and the greatest number is in California due to population.
Erod said:a LOT more people die in Illinois from gun violence than Texas
To address the original story, this guy is either terminally stupid or...
Gawddammit it's a liberal con-spiracy! Ah tell you that nobody nohow would do this un-less the Gobernment told them to! They're ony doin' this to take away our Second Amendment rahts as Amuricans!
Probably one of those.
If they arrested everyone who carried a gun near the White House the jails would be overflowing. It is DC you know!
...and if they arrested everyone who carried a gun, 200 rounds of ammunition, said he wanted to fire "a couple shots", and was arrested by the Secret Service you would have.... this guy.