[W:446]Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Perhaps in the old days but not so much today. The only Democratic leader that I can think of who supported gun rights was Kennedy but that was back in the early 60s, not today.

We arent discussing 'leaders,' we're discussing citizens.

 

[SkyFox76]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I have created several babies four that I know of..

Excepting creating and having aren't the same. Perhaps Lovebug should have made it more clear in saying men cannot carry a baby in their body for 9 months and give birth to it.

Aside from that women can own and shoots guns, so bad comparison from the OP.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Guns aren't much use if you're ambushed. You know nothing of violence

When cops or soldiers have the initiative, that's where guns play their part.



Basically, if you're attacked, your gun counts for nothing if the attack is determined.

If you see your daughter getting raped in a parking lot, you have your gun ready - YOU have the initiative, you are in control.

It's you who fail to understand how life works.

So you agree with me, in a very snarky way. Cool, your attitude runs off my back like water off a duck.

(It's cute tho, that you think responding to a 'determined' attack cant be just as 'determined' and there's a good chance that training will make the difference for the legal citizen.)

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

"At one time, she was the only person in San Francisco to possess a concealed carry permit."

Talkianne Feinstein/Archive 1 - Wikipedia

LMAO, here's the qualifier posted directly above that discussion in Wiki: This page has hosted a reversion war over the following paragraph mentioning gun control.

Your claim is not remotely verified, it's hotly debated.

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I'd much rather have armed, trained guards and safe spaces for children to go to than hope that a teacher or two that may or may not know what they are doing is armed and willing to use their gun to stop the shooter. Guards, who train and only have to concentrate on guarding the children would be much safer. And do drills.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

But that is you. You may rather have an guard like Parkwood's Scot Peterson protecting you in school but that does not mean you should refuse to allow other teachers to arm themselves for protection instead.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

If not babies then what are being killed in abortions, monkeys?

Babies are born. The unborn are...not :roll:

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

But that is you. You may rather have an guard like Parkwood's Scot Peterson protecting you in school but that does not mean you should refuse to allow other teachers to arm themselves for protection instead.

Arm the kids.


The sandbox gets rough

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

This is why it is generally pointless to debate you. Highly biased, ridiculous arguments that demonstrate your hate of Democrats.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

I do struggle trying to love those who hate God and God Bless America and those who despise good Christian people everywhere.

 

[Irredentist]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I do struggle trying to love those who hate God and God Bless America and those who despise good Christian people everywhere.

Don't feel bad. You're just like most Christians who fail to live up the expectations of their God.

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

LMAO, here's the qualifier posted directly above that discussion in Wiki: This page has hosted a reversion war over the following paragraph mentioning gun control.

Your claim is not remotely verified, it's hotly debated.

I see. Democrats have started a war in an effort to have the facts in the story changed. I'm not surprised

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I see. Democrats have started a war in an effort to have the facts in the story changed. I'm not surprised

That's right...it's a ridiculous claim that anyone would question to begin with, but "everyone that doesnt agree with you" is wrong. :roll:

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

LMAO, here's the qualifier posted directly above that discussion in Wiki: This page has hosted a reversion war over the following paragraph mentioning gun control.

Your claim is not remotely verified, it's hotly debated.

OK then. What is the truth or are you suggesting the truth is not what some people post but that it cannot be shown to be something else either? Since you offer nothing to support democrat objections to the reported facts, allow me to offer more reported facts to try to give substance to the aforementioned reported facts.

"... in the 1970s..., Feinstein explained, she decided to arm herself..."

"When I walked to the hospital when my husband was sick, I carried a concealed weapon."

"Feinstein got rid of the permit once the New World Liberation Front was no longer a threat to her."

Sen. Feinstein no longer has concealed weapon permit | TheHill

I applaud Feinstein for arming herself against credible threats. I also applaud hundreds of millions of Americans for arming themselves against credible threats.

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Arm the kids.


The sandbox gets rough

What are you talking about? Arm the kids? That is stupid.

 

[VanceMack]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Unborn do not have rights. Only those who are born have recognized rights in the US.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Im fine with that. But then you are going to have to have a little integrity with your position then. When someone other than the mother is responsible for killing an unborn child the worst they can get charged with is simple assault of the mother. And stop bleating on about pre-natal care...talk to us after the clump of cells is worth giving a **** over.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

What are you talking about? Arm the kids? That is stupid.

I guess you want them defenseless.

Kinderguardians!!!!!


Murica

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

OK then. What is the truth or are you suggesting the truth is not what some people post but that it cannot be shown to be something else either? Since you offer nothing to support democrat objections to the reported facts, allow me to offer more reported facts to try to give substance to the aforementioned reported facts.

"... in the 1970s..., Feinstein explained, she decided to arm herself..."

"When I walked to the hospital when my husband was sick, I carried a concealed weapon."

"Feinstein got rid of the permit once the New World Liberation Front was no longer a threat to her."

Sen. Feinstein no longer has concealed weapon permit | TheHill

I applaud Feinstein for arming herself against credible threats. I also applaud hundreds of millions of Americans for arming themselves against credible threats.

I never denied that she had the permit...and it's the claim that she had the ONLY one that I disputed and so does everyone in that NOTED disclaimer stated in Wikipedia :doh

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Don't feel bad. You're just like most Christians who fail to live up the expectations of their God.

I am happy to say, however, that the Lord has comforted me with what He had written in 2 Chronicles 19:2. The Lord does not want Christians loving enemies of God when loving the enemies of God gives others the impression that there is nothing wrong with the enemies of God rebelling against God

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Im fine with that. But then you are going to have to have a little integrity with your position then. When someone other than the mother is responsible for killing an unborn child the worst they can get charged with is simple assault of the mother. And stop bleating on about pre-natal care...talk to us after the clump of cells is worth giving a **** over.

What makes you think that she supports that?Not that that's wrong.**

You are wrong about that anyway...since those charges, when brought *by the states, never federal* are brought on behalf of the mother and/or the state...meaning the concern is the damages, the loss, to "the woman or the state."

States can charge people for killing pets and livestock too, those are also on behalf of others, in that case, owners. It's still a crime because the state recognizes that the unborn, the pet, the livestock *all have value to the woman or owners.*

And that makes perfect sense. A pregnant woman is someone who wants a her baby :doh and such a loss is huge to her/her husband/bf. It's sad that this needs to be explained.

**And that's why it's not hypocritical to support those laws...they recognize the pain and loss of mother/couple, people who obviously wanted the pregnancy and someday, a baby.

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I never denied that she had the permit...and it's the claim that she had the ONLY one that I disputed and so does everyone in that NOTED disclaimer stated in Wikipedia :doh

Really? Who was the first person in San Francisco to ever get a gun permit and how many gun permits were in San Francisco the day Feinstein got hers? Is it impossible for modern investigative journalists to come up with some factual details to refute a story they do not like or must we simply accept the story to be false if leftists say it it not true even though they fail to prove it untrue?

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Really? Who was the first person in San Francisco to ever get a gun permit and how many gun permits were in San Francisco the day Feinstein got hers? Is it impossible for modern investigative journalists to come up with some factual details to refute a story they do not like or must we simply accept the story to be false if leftists say it it not true even though they fail to prove it untrue?

Um...that's disputed. How would I have that info. You provided a single source that is heavily disputed...meaning not proven.

And uh, how convenient you choose to believe something you believe cant be proven. BTW, they would have records of those things :doh

 

[marke]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

Um...that's disputed. How would I have that info. You provided a single source that is heavily disputed...meaning not proven.

And uh, how convenient you choose to believe something you believe cant be proven. BTW, they would have records of those things :doh

I believe something which cannot be proven? Why can it not be proven? Are there no records which have survived until today? If nobody can prove Dianne was not the only person to have a permit are they wrong for believing something they cannot prove?

 

[Lursa]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

I believe something which cannot be proven? Why can it not be proven? Are there no records which have survived until today? If nobody can prove Dianne was not the only person to have a permit are they wrong for believing something they cannot prove?

I dont have those answers...all I know is Wiki has a disclaimer that says your claim *is not proven and is under dispute.*

And of course only the gullible and indoctrinated believe something unproven ONLY because it conforms to their belief.


And I never wrote it cant be proven, I wrote that apparently, it hasnt been proven. I'd bet, as I wrote, those records still exist.

 

[DebateChallenge]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

We arent discussing 'leaders,' we're discussing citizens.

Go to any shooting class or gun range, I've been to many, and by far most of the people there won't be democrats. You might find a few democrats at such places but they are far and few between.

 

[DebateChallenge]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

So what, mot woman are capable of injuring a man...

She might get in a few scratches but what good would that do? It wouldn't stop the man intent on raping her and the end result would be the same, she would get raped.

And they can also scream very loudly, and sound travels far if at night.

Not if he's got his hands around her neck.

This is why in an assault, a rapist would probably be armed with something....even if he's a mugger and the object is simple robbery

Some rapists might be armed, some might not be. Making it harder for good people to legally get guns will not make a difference in that regard.

Nope, police officers carry guns so they can initiate confrontation.


Their guns are at the ready if an incident goes South and they meet with resistance (armed or otherwise) in say a traffic stop in which the cops should always retain the initiative.


Of course if they're ambushed they have their guns, if (big if) they retain the power to draw them.

So now you're an expert on police work?

Spoken like you know something of policing or soldiering.

You cannot be always alerts.

I do know a few things about soldiering and about Jeff Cooper's color code of awareness. The only time when you should be in the white, when you're totally unaware, is when you're sleeping.

 

[Rich2018]

Re: Women Being Involved In The Gun Debate

She might get in a few scratches but what good would that do?

1. It would hurt

2. It would mark him

3. His DNA is under her fingernails

Not if he's got his hands around her neck.

Yes she can and well before that

Some rapists might be armed, some might not be. Making it harder for good people to legally get guns will not make a difference in that regard.

It won't make much difference if a woman is attacked and making it easier for her to get guns, makes it for the rapist to get a gun.

So now you're an expert on police work?

Not an expert no, though I have worked with British armed police in my army days

I do know a few things about soldiering and about Jeff Cooper's color code of awareness. The only time when you should be in the white, when you're totally unaware, is when you're sleeping.

Where did you learn about soldiering ?