why would the kid lunge at his father? why wouldnt he identify himself? why didnt the father call out a verbal warning?
All excellent -- and as yet unanswered -- questions. Which is why I heavily caveated my posts with "conjecture" and "don't have the detail".
And now we're finding out the kid was shot multiple times? Even more strangeness in this half-story.
Even if the kid was robbing the aunt; even if the kid WAS lunging at the stepdad in order to stab him -- can you even imagine the grief that would go along with killing your stepson? Yikes.
if i was doing something shifty and was confronted by my father who was armed, i think id be whipping that balaclava off lickety split and saying, dad its me dont shoot. but i dunno... was the kid high or something? was he mentally unstable? did he not understand the gravity of his situation? well i guess the last question will probably go unanswered considering.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
if i was doing something shifty and was confronted by my father who was armed, i think id be whipping that balaclava off lickety split and saying, dad its me dont shoot. but i dunno... was the kid high or something? was he mentally unstable? did he not understand the gravity of his situation? well i guess the last question will probably go unanswered considering.
Ok yeah I had to google "balaclava". But I agree, too much of this story doesn't make sense yet.
This statement is 100 percent true. But you can say that with everything that kills people. less cars means less deaths, less cigarettes means less death, less alcohol means less wife beaters and drunk drivers. Can you imagine how many animal lives alone would be saved if there were less cars.
Ok finally heard this yesterday in the car on the news radio channel.
Left me with many questions and a fishy feeling. I need more info.
We had gun related stories here in Atl this week. One a homeowner defended himself
and his property and sent 2 parasites to the hospital and then off to prison,
hopefully for a long time, helping many others like himself not to be victimized.
The other very sad...
A well loved shop keep described as a man who would give you the shirt of his back,
a pillar in his small community, stopped and got groceries on his way home
early one evening last week.
Unarmed he was unloading his trunk and was shot dead.
His family, friends, myself are mourning this incredible man and his senseless death.
The sick bastards are on the street to kill again.
One never knows when it will be their turn.
If one feels the need to be prepared to defend themselves or their home,
as many do these days,
it is our right and in doing so you may prevent others from being victimized also.
This kid ... he had a knife along? :? 1 am breaking into the next door neighbors house?
Why? It's his Aunts house what was the weapon for? Something fishy here yes? http://www.theledger.com/article/201209 ... -Next-Door
So, if the guy had might have had a gun (as you kind of suggested would have been a wise thing to have never knowing when it will be your turn)... am I to assume you think that, while unloading the trunk of his car, he would have had the wherewithal to drop his load, grab his 'rightfully owned' handgun, quickly take aim, and then put a cap in that 'sick bastard's' ass before getting shot? Just as easy as that, huh? You have a gun and all the problems go away?
Let me more directly suggest that if the gun the 'sick bastard' used wasn't on the streets to begin with... the poor fellow might be watching the Ryder Cup as I write.
As for the guy shooting his son... well, geez. Brutal. And weird. A really strange story.
Foolishness, do you live in la la land? I hear la la land has no guns
This man lived in Riverdale, the real world, really real.
Bad guys will always have guns ... always. They follow no laws,
their purpose is to victimize others, this is their livelihood.
And yes if he had had a gun he may have had a chance...
like the first gun incident which you don't address at all ...
why is that? Cause the homeowner, like many, are fighting back and succeeding.
One would think you would be happy for that man and actually give him kudos
for taking two off the streets.
I am, I do
Weird story here yes ... what was that kid thinking? What did he expect to get?
and why? If you wanted to steal something from your Aunt's house wouldn't it be
better to be there in broad daylight and just try to sneak it. And why armed with
a knife? Was he prepared to use it? Having a weapon along makes it sinister....
down right crazy crap.
I shouldn't get into this with you because whenever I do... I am lesser for it. I feel as if I have argued with a child; however, you have called me foolish and because you have... a response is demanded.
I initially got sucked into responding to your dribble because you seem to look for opportunities to flaunt your position over and over again regarding gun control- remember the thread that got locked when you used a PJ forum record 1,242 :fp: ?
You advocate for 'wild west justice': a society that sees everyone armed and gunning down anyone that comes across as a threat. Sheer absurdity. Ridiculous.
So, if the guy had might have had a gun (as you kind of suggested would have been a wise thing to have never knowing when it will be your turn)... am I to assume you think that, while unloading the trunk of his car, he would have had the wherewithal to drop his load, grab his 'rightfully owned' handgun, quickly take aim, and then put a cap in that 'sick bastard's' ass before getting shot? Just as easy as that, huh? You have a gun and all the problems go away?
Let me more directly suggest that if the gun the 'sick bastard' used wasn't on the streets to begin with... the poor fellow might be watching the Ryder Cup as I write.
As for the guy shooting his son... well, geez. Brutal. And weird. A really strange story.
Foolishness, do you live in la la land? I hear la la land has no guns
This man lived in Riverdale, the real world, really real.
Bad guys will always have guns ... always. They follow no laws,
their purpose is to victimize others, this is their livelihood.
And yes if he had had a gun he may have had a chance...
like the first gun incident which you don't address at all ...
why is that? Cause the homeowner, like many, are fighting back and succeeding.
One would think you would be happy for that man and actually give him kudos
for taking two off the streets.
I am, I do
Weird story here yes ... what was that kid thinking? What did he expect to get?
and why? If you wanted to steal something from your Aunt's house wouldn't it be
better to be there in broad daylight and just try to sneak it. And why armed with
a knife? Was he prepared to use it? Having a weapon along makes it sinister....
down right crazy crap.
I shouldn't get into this with you because whenever I do... I am lesser for it. I feel as if I have argued with a child; however, you have called me foolish and because you have... a response is demanded.
I initially got sucked into responding to your dribble because you seem to look for opportunities to flaunt your position over and over again regarding gun control- remember the thread that got locked when you used a PJ forum record 1,242 :fp: ?
You advocate for 'wild west justice': a society that sees everyone armed and gunning down anyone that comes across as a threat. Sheer absurdity. Ridiculous.
And you ask me if I live in La La Land?
Please resist! don't get sucked in again, Dribble... insulting and arrogant, it was you, of course, who responded first :fp:
and flaunt... or is it you flaunting your anti gun stance?...
come on ...
I told 2 stories that happened here, real life stories
that affected me personally and explains exactly why I feel this basic right
is needed. You don't agree fine but don't put another poster down
with derogatory statements. Poor show on your part.
Could this be the lessor part?
It is foolish to believe we can rid the streets of guns. Do you live in the US?
This is what I call foolishness and la la land.... nothing insulting or directed at you.
Speaking of a child, a child understands, this is basic to protect oneself.
Again why don't you speak of the other story where the homeowner protected himself
and property?
puttingt two bad guys in prison, protecting society in turn?
Oh wait, I know why.
And why can you not give him a kudos for being alive and fighting back?
Would you have him dead too?
And why must you think if the man who was shot dead by the trunk of his car,
why could he have not had a fighting chance?
That his outcome could not be the same as the victory for the homeowner?
Oh wait, I know why.
As far as the Wild West, perhaps that had a lot to do with where our laws originated.
I think when someone forces their way into your home,
where your wife and children sleep, it might feel very much the same as long ago, the right to protect.
Today it is within the law to protect one's own life and property.
Many are choosing to do this. Many are succeeding,
contrary to what the anti gun people will recognize, as you with my story.
Here lies the key.
And yes, by all means lets agree to disagree on gun ownership and protecting oneself.
Again with this particular story so many questions.
When were the police called? Who called them?
was it before or as the father ran next door? Or was that after the fact?
Was the teen on drugs, as someone mentioned? Motive? Why was he armed?
If his reason was to burglarize why have a knife?
I googled again no new answers to the questions.
Again why don't you speak of the other story where the homeowner protected himself
and property?
puttingt two bad guys in prison, protecting society in turn?
Oh wait, I know why.
does anyone else get bored of reading this kind of argument?
Is it really worth shooting 2 people, 2 people who might die, because they want your TV?
What if they had guns... is it worth totally endangering the lives of yourself, your family, etc because some shitbag wants your iPad?
weird.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Again why don't you speak of the other story where the homeowner protected himself
and property?
puttingt two bad guys in prison, protecting society in turn?
Oh wait, I know why.
does anyone else get bored of reading this kind of argument?
Is it really worth shooting 2 people, 2 people who might die, because they want your TV?
What if they had guns... is it worth totally endangering the lives of yourself, your family, etc because some shitbag wants your iPad?
weird.
That's obviously equally as silly. Sometimes they want more than your iPad.
Again why don't you speak of the other story where the homeowner protected himself
and property?
puttingt two bad guys in prison, protecting society in turn?
Oh wait, I know why.
does anyone else get bored of reading this kind of argument?
Is it really worth shooting 2 people, 2 people who might die, because they want your TV?
What if they had guns... is it worth totally endangering the lives of yourself, your family, etc because some shitbag wants your iPad?
weird.
Bored with ... :fp: wow that say's alot...
can you put yourself in the shoes of someone who has faced home invasion?
Or are you so far removed from that danger you can not empathize?
The scum who enter homes are preying upon others,
they put themselves in the position for violence.
Many homeowners will not be victims,
as the local homeowner here and yes I'm glad for the outcome,
two predators off the street.
If you choose to be a victim fine that's your choice but that's not fine with everyone,
some people are willing to protect themselves and their homes. It is their choice.
So, if the guy had might have had a gun (as you kind of suggested would have been a wise thing to have never knowing when it will be your turn)... am I to assume you think that, while unloading the trunk of his car, he would have had the wherewithal to drop his load, grab his 'rightfully owned' handgun, quickly take aim, and then put a cap in that 'sick bastard's' ass before getting shot? Just as easy as that, huh? You have a gun and all the problems go away?
Yeah... I was trying to figure out how one could do that.. lightening and super sharp reflexes being caught by surprise, with your hands full.... Should this person have had a gun on him, it would not had made an iota of difference.
In the case of the story ref this thread - I bet Mr. Giuliano wishes he hadn't been so quick on the trigger.... Not only does he have to live with the thought of killing a human being, he has to live with the fact he killed his son.
Your response and your :fp: have absolutely nothing to do with what I said. But you know that...
I'm not getting into a 'discussion' with you. I have stated an opinion, that is all. Not choosing to be armed is NOT choosing to be a victim. As I said: 'nuff said. End of...
Your response and your :fp: have absolutely nothing to do with what I said. But you know that...
I'm not getting into a 'discussion' with you. I have stated an opinion, that is all. Not choosing to be armed is NOT choosing to be a victim. As I said: 'nuff said. End of...
Granny did not choose to be a victim...
men came into her home and brutally victimized her.
Now she is choosing to be a gun owner after living through that.
Certainly can't blame her.
Colo attack victim wants debates to address guns, By THOMAS PEIPERT
The Associated Press
DENVER — A man wounded in the mass shooting at a Colorado movie theater is appearing in a nationwide television spot aimed at drawing attention to gun violence as part of the upcoming presidential debates.
Stephen Barton, 22, of Southbury, Conn., was among the 58 people injured in the July 20 attack in Aurora that also left 12 people dead.
Barton was bicycling across the country and staying with a friend the night of the shooting. He now does victim outreach and policy research for Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which helped produce the ad that began airing Monday.
In the 30-second TV spot, Barton urges people to ask themselves during the debates which candidate has a plan to stop gun violence.
Filmed inside an empty movie theater, Barton talks about his experience during the shooting as photos are shown of jagged gunshot wounds to his face and neck.
"I was lucky. In the next four years, 48,000 Americans won't be so lucky, because they'll be murdered with guns in the next president's term, enough to fill over 200 theaters," Barton says in the ad.
Meanwhile, the families of eight people killed in the theater shooting joined the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to urge the moderator of Wednesday's debate to ask President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney about gun violence.
"To ignore the problem of gun violence in a state where two of the worst shootings in U.S. history took place — Aurora and Columbine — would not only be noticeable by its absence but would slight the memories of our loved ones killed," the letter said.
Jim Lehrer of PBS is moderating the event at the University of Denver.
Obama and Romney have been largely quiet about guns during the campaign, except when prodded about high-profile cases.
Obama has supported a renewed ban on assault-type weapons, and he blames Congress for opposing such measures. The president also has signed laws allowing people to carry concealed weapons in national parks and in checked bags on Amtrak trains.
Romney says he thinks the nation needs tougher enforcement of gun laws already on the books, not new gun laws. The key is to identify deranged or distressed people and keep them from carrying out terrible acts, he says.
The TV ad featuring Barton is part of the "Demand A Plan" campaign led by shooting survivors and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group of more than 725 mayors who advocate closing what they say are loopholes in laws designed to prevent felons, domestic violence offenders, people who are seriously mentally ill and other dangerous people from obtaining firearms.
"Especially now, given what's happened in the past few months with guns and these mass shootings, I don't think there is a better opportunity to talk about this," Barton told The Associated Press.
Barton said it's frustrating that the candidates have shied away from gun policy, and he hopes the new ad will start a conversation about gun violence and how to stop it.
"At some point we have to demand a certain level of courage and independence among politicians," he said. "At some point you just have to expect more, even in an election season."
The ad, which does not endorse Obama or Romney, indicates it was paid for by the United Against Illegal Guns Support Fund, the fundraising arm for Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
Colo attack victim wants debates to address guns, By THOMAS PEIPERT
The Associated Press
DENVER — A man wounded in the mass shooting at a Colorado movie theater is appearing in a nationwide television spot aimed at drawing attention to gun violence as part of the upcoming presidential debates.
Stephen Barton, 22, of Southbury, Conn., was among the 58 people injured in the July 20 attack in Aurora that also left 12 people dead.
Barton was bicycling across the country and staying with a friend the night of the shooting. He now does victim outreach and policy research for Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which helped produce the ad that began airing Monday.
In the 30-second TV spot, Barton urges people to ask themselves during the debates which candidate has a plan to stop gun violence.
Filmed inside an empty movie theater, Barton talks about his experience during the shooting as photos are shown of jagged gunshot wounds to his face and neck.
"I was lucky. In the next four years, 48,000 Americans won't be so lucky, because they'll be murdered with guns in the next president's term, enough to fill over 200 theaters," Barton says in the ad.
Meanwhile, the families of eight people killed in the theater shooting joined the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to urge the moderator of Wednesday's debate to ask President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney about gun violence.
"To ignore the problem of gun violence in a state where two of the worst shootings in U.S. history took place — Aurora and Columbine — would not only be noticeable by its absence but would slight the memories of our loved ones killed," the letter said.
Jim Lehrer of PBS is moderating the event at the University of Denver.
Obama and Romney have been largely quiet about guns during the campaign, except when prodded about high-profile cases.
Obama has supported a renewed ban on assault-type weapons, and he blames Congress for opposing such measures. The president also has signed laws allowing people to carry concealed weapons in national parks and in checked bags on Amtrak trains.
Romney says he thinks the nation needs tougher enforcement of gun laws already on the books, not new gun laws. The key is to identify deranged or distressed people and keep them from carrying out terrible acts, he says.
The TV ad featuring Barton is part of the "Demand A Plan" campaign led by shooting survivors and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group of more than 725 mayors who advocate closing what they say are loopholes in laws designed to prevent felons, domestic violence offenders, people who are seriously mentally ill and other dangerous people from obtaining firearms.
"Especially now, given what's happened in the past few months with guns and these mass shootings, I don't think there is a better opportunity to talk about this," Barton told The Associated Press.
Barton said it's frustrating that the candidates have shied away from gun policy, and he hopes the new ad will start a conversation about gun violence and how to stop it.
"At some point we have to demand a certain level of courage and independence among politicians," he said. "At some point you just have to expect more, even in an election season."
The ad, which does not endorse Obama or Romney, indicates it was paid for by the United Against Illegal Guns Support Fund, the fundraising arm for Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
Romney says he thinks the nation needs tougher enforcement of gun laws already on the books, not new gun laws. The key is to identify deranged or distressed people and keep them from carrying out terrible acts, he says.
hmmm...
that sounds like someone I know
it still makes no sense no matter who says it. how the hell do you keep guns out of the hands of the deranged?? most people who commit these horrific crimes are perfectly normal and mentally healthy when they purchased the gun. so how does that work??
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Colo attack victim wants debates to address guns, By THOMAS PEIPERT
The Associated Press
DENVER — A man wounded in the mass shooting at a Colorado movie theater is appearing in a nationwide television spot aimed at drawing attention to gun violence as part of the upcoming presidential debates.
Stephen Barton, 22, of Southbury, Conn., was among the 58 people injured in the July 20 attack in Aurora that also left 12 people dead.
Barton was bicycling across the country and staying with a friend the night of the shooting. He now does victim outreach and policy research for Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which helped produce the ad that began airing Monday.
In the 30-second TV spot, Barton urges people to ask themselves during the debates which candidate has a plan to stop gun violence.
Filmed inside an empty movie theater, Barton talks about his experience during the shooting as photos are shown of jagged gunshot wounds to his face and neck.
"I was lucky. In the next four years, 48,000 Americans won't be so lucky, because they'll be murdered with guns in the next president's term, enough to fill over 200 theaters," Barton says in the ad.
Meanwhile, the families of eight people killed in the theater shooting joined the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to urge the moderator of Wednesday's debate to ask President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney about gun violence.
"To ignore the problem of gun violence in a state where two of the worst shootings in U.S. history took place — Aurora and Columbine — would not only be noticeable by its absence but would slight the memories of our loved ones killed," the letter said.
Jim Lehrer of PBS is moderating the event at the University of Denver.
Obama and Romney have been largely quiet about guns during the campaign, except when prodded about high-profile cases.
Obama has supported a renewed ban on assault-type weapons, and he blames Congress for opposing such measures. The president also has signed laws allowing people to carry concealed weapons in national parks and in checked bags on Amtrak trains.
Romney says he thinks the nation needs tougher enforcement of gun laws already on the books, not new gun laws. The key is to identify deranged or distressed people and keep them from carrying out terrible acts, he says.
The TV ad featuring Barton is part of the "Demand A Plan" campaign led by shooting survivors and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group of more than 725 mayors who advocate closing what they say are loopholes in laws designed to prevent felons, domestic violence offenders, people who are seriously mentally ill and other dangerous people from obtaining firearms.
"Especially now, given what's happened in the past few months with guns and these mass shootings, I don't think there is a better opportunity to talk about this," Barton told The Associated Press.
Barton said it's frustrating that the candidates have shied away from gun policy, and he hopes the new ad will start a conversation about gun violence and how to stop it.
"At some point we have to demand a certain level of courage and independence among politicians," he said. "At some point you just have to expect more, even in an election season."
The ad, which does not endorse Obama or Romney, indicates it was paid for by the United Against Illegal Guns Support Fund, the fundraising arm for Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
does anyone else think the use of the face palm is becoming somewhat overused? can words be used instead or is facepalming just a quick and easy way? im tired of seeing it.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
does anyone else think the use of the face palm is becoming somewhat overused? can words be used instead or is facepalming just a quick and easy way? im tired of seeing it.
does anyone else think the use of the face palm is becoming somewhat overused? can words be used instead or is facepalming just a quick and easy way? im tired of seeing it.
it's an acceptable way of being rude and condescending.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
does anyone else think the use of the face palm is becoming somewhat overused? can words be used instead or is facepalming just a quick and easy way? im tired of seeing it.
it's an acceptable way of being rude and condescending.
ah condescending... thats the word i was looking for. thanx.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Romney says he thinks the nation needs tougher enforcement of gun laws already on the books, not new gun laws. The key is to identify deranged or distressed people and keep them from carrying out terrible acts, he says.
hmmm...
that sounds like someone I know
it still makes no sense no matter who says it. how the hell do you keep guns out of the hands of the deranged?? most people who commit these horrific crimes are perfectly normal and mentally healthy when they purchased the gun. so how does that work??
if you think what I believe is stupid, bizarre, ridiculous or outrageous.....it's ok, I think I had a brain tumor when I wrote that.
That sounds nice in theory, but how would that work? The reason I ask is, right now cocaine is banned, banned like you want these guns to be, yet I can have an 8 ball delivered to my house in 30 minutes if I so desired. so what is it about guns that would be different than drugs and alcohol back in the day?
Those steps sound promising, most of them anyways, I still don't understand how you would ban assault rifles and not expect them to get into bad peoples hands. I say that just based on what I know about the black market and supply and demand. The other things sound fine, but surely you know that only law abiding citizens care about laws. So you can make laws till your blue in the face, but criminals don't really care about them.
That sounds nice in theory, but how would that work? The reason I ask is, right now cocaine is banned, banned like you want these guns to be, yet I can have an 8 ball delivered to my house in 30 minutes if I so desired. so what is it about guns that would be different than drugs and alcohol back in the day?
I'll never understand the idea of "well bad guys have (banned item), so we might as well make it legal so good guys can have (banned item) too!".
in Canada no one is allowed a hand gun, never mind conceal and carry. the idea is to make it illegal so if a bad guy is caught with it, you can do something about it, not say "hey, enjoy your right to conceal and carry around my family, gang banger! have a great afternoon!"
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I know exactly what you mean, I can never understand how people can think that human beings shouldn't be allowed to defend themselves against criminals with guns just to keep a percentage of guns off the streets. I guess both our viewpoints are on opposite sides of the spectrum. But that's what makes debating possible...and fun.
That sounds nice in theory, but how would that work?
I'll never understand the idea of "well bad guys have (banned item), so we might as well make it legal so good guys can have (banned item) too!".
in Canada no one is allowed a hand gun, never mind conceal and carry. the idea is to make it illegal so if a bad guy is caught with it, you can do something about it, not say "hey, enjoy your right to conceal and carry around my family, gang banger! have a great afternoon!"
if you think what I believe is stupid, bizarre, ridiculous or outrageous.....it's ok, I think I had a brain tumor when I wrote that.
does anyone else think the use of the face palm is becoming somewhat overused? can words be used instead or is facepalming just a quick and easy way? im tired of seeing it.
...
The best is when it is used by someone who has no clue on what they are talking about... in response to someone who does.
...
I like it when someone I think might be dumb... proves to me that they are actually... dumb. It's funny.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Comments
if i was doing something shifty and was confronted by my father who was armed, i think id be whipping that balaclava off lickety split and saying, dad its me dont shoot. but i dunno... was the kid high or something? was he mentally unstable? did he not understand the gravity of his situation? well i guess the last question will probably go unanswered considering.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I shouldn't get into this with you because whenever I do... I am lesser for it. I feel as if I have argued with a child; however, you have called me foolish and because you have... a response is demanded.
I initially got sucked into responding to your dribble because you seem to look for opportunities to flaunt your position over and over again regarding gun control- remember the thread that got locked when you used a PJ forum record 1,242 :fp: ?
You advocate for 'wild west justice': a society that sees everyone armed and gunning down anyone that comes across as a threat. Sheer absurdity. Ridiculous.
And you ask me if I live in La La Land?
Dribble... insulting and arrogant, it was you, of course, who responded first :fp:
and flaunt... or is it you flaunting your anti gun stance?...
come on ...
I told 2 stories that happened here, real life stories
that affected me personally and explains exactly why I feel this basic right
is needed. You don't agree fine but don't put another poster down
with derogatory statements. Poor show on your part.
Could this be the lessor part?
It is foolish to believe we can rid the streets of guns. Do you live in the US?
This is what I call foolishness and la la land.... nothing insulting or directed at you.
Speaking of a child, a child understands, this is basic to protect oneself.
Again why don't you speak of the other story where the homeowner protected himself
and property?
puttingt two bad guys in prison, protecting society in turn?
Oh wait, I know why.
And why can you not give him a kudos for being alive and fighting back?
Would you have him dead too?
And why must you think if the man who was shot dead by the trunk of his car,
why could he have not had a fighting chance?
That his outcome could not be the same as the victory for the homeowner?
Oh wait, I know why.
As far as the Wild West, perhaps that had a lot to do with where our laws originated.
I think when someone forces their way into your home,
where your wife and children sleep, it might feel very much the same as long ago,
the right to protect.
Today it is within the law to protect one's own life and property.
Many are choosing to do this. Many are succeeding,
contrary to what the anti gun people will recognize, as you with my story.
Here lies the key.
And yes, by all means lets agree to disagree on gun ownership and protecting oneself.
Again with this particular story so many questions.
When were the police called? Who called them?
was it before or as the father ran next door? Or was that after the fact?
Was the teen on drugs, as someone mentioned? Motive? Why was he armed?
If his reason was to burglarize why have a knife?
I googled again no new answers to the questions.
does anyone else get bored of reading this kind of argument?
Is it really worth shooting 2 people, 2 people who might die, because they want your TV?
What if they had guns... is it worth totally endangering the lives of yourself, your family, etc because some shitbag wants your iPad?
weird.
That's obviously equally as silly. Sometimes they want more than your iPad.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/conn ... GckNdCKO/1
Bored with ... :fp: wow that say's alot...
can you put yourself in the shoes of someone who has faced home invasion?
Or are you so far removed from that danger you can not empathize?
The scum who enter homes are preying upon others,
they put themselves in the position for violence.
Many homeowners will not be victims,
as the local homeowner here and yes I'm glad for the outcome,
two predators off the street.
If you choose to be a victim fine that's your choice but that's not fine with everyone,
some people are willing to protect themselves and their homes. It is their choice.
Choosing to be a victim if one chooses not be armed... :roll:
'nuff said.
Yeah... I was trying to figure out how one could do that.. lightening and super sharp reflexes being caught by surprise, with your hands full.... Should this person have had a gun on him, it would not had made an iota of difference.
In the case of the story ref this thread - I bet Mr. Giuliano wishes he hadn't been so quick on the trigger.... Not only does he have to live with the thought of killing a human being, he has to live with the fact he killed his son.
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/gr ... inv/nPtFr/
it would be good to meditate on exactly what she experienced
can you feel it?
then if you want to judge her for deciding to own a gun ...
whatever :fp:
how bout people just realize it's a choice...
you don't want a gun, maybe never need a gun good for you...
this Granny needs and wants one.
Your response and your :fp: have absolutely nothing to do with what I said. But you know that...
I'm not getting into a 'discussion' with you. I have stated an opinion, that is all. Not choosing to be armed is NOT choosing to be a victim. As I said: 'nuff said. End of...
men came into her home and brutally victimized her.
Now she is choosing to be a gun owner after living through that.
Certainly can't blame her.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/ap/ap/crim ... -ad/nSQXd/
Colo attack victim wants debates to address guns, By THOMAS PEIPERT
The Associated Press
DENVER — A man wounded in the mass shooting at a Colorado movie theater is appearing in a nationwide television spot aimed at drawing attention to gun violence as part of the upcoming presidential debates.
Stephen Barton, 22, of Southbury, Conn., was among the 58 people injured in the July 20 attack in Aurora that also left 12 people dead.
Barton was bicycling across the country and staying with a friend the night of the shooting. He now does victim outreach and policy research for Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which helped produce the ad that began airing Monday.
In the 30-second TV spot, Barton urges people to ask themselves during the debates which candidate has a plan to stop gun violence.
Filmed inside an empty movie theater, Barton talks about his experience during the shooting as photos are shown of jagged gunshot wounds to his face and neck.
"I was lucky. In the next four years, 48,000 Americans won't be so lucky, because they'll be murdered with guns in the next president's term, enough to fill over 200 theaters," Barton says in the ad.
Meanwhile, the families of eight people killed in the theater shooting joined the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to urge the moderator of Wednesday's debate to ask President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney about gun violence.
"To ignore the problem of gun violence in a state where two of the worst shootings in U.S. history took place — Aurora and Columbine — would not only be noticeable by its absence but would slight the memories of our loved ones killed," the letter said.
Jim Lehrer of PBS is moderating the event at the University of Denver.
Obama and Romney have been largely quiet about guns during the campaign, except when prodded about high-profile cases.
Obama has supported a renewed ban on assault-type weapons, and he blames Congress for opposing such measures. The president also has signed laws allowing people to carry concealed weapons in national parks and in checked bags on Amtrak trains.
Romney says he thinks the nation needs tougher enforcement of gun laws already on the books, not new gun laws. The key is to identify deranged or distressed people and keep them from carrying out terrible acts, he says.
The TV ad featuring Barton is part of the "Demand A Plan" campaign led by shooting survivors and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group of more than 725 mayors who advocate closing what they say are loopholes in laws designed to prevent felons, domestic violence offenders, people who are seriously mentally ill and other dangerous people from obtaining firearms.
"Especially now, given what's happened in the past few months with guns and these mass shootings, I don't think there is a better opportunity to talk about this," Barton told The Associated Press.
Barton said it's frustrating that the candidates have shied away from gun policy, and he hopes the new ad will start a conversation about gun violence and how to stop it.
"At some point we have to demand a certain level of courage and independence among politicians," he said. "At some point you just have to expect more, even in an election season."
The ad, which does not endorse Obama or Romney, indicates it was paid for by the United Against Illegal Guns Support Fund, the fundraising arm for Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yT8CSgh43E
that sounds like someone I know
it still makes no sense no matter who says it. how the hell do you keep guns out of the hands of the deranged?? most people who commit these horrific crimes are perfectly normal and mentally healthy when they purchased the gun. so how does that work??
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I knew I heard that somewhere
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
it's an acceptable way of being rude and condescending.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
ah condescending... thats the word i was looking for. thanx.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
ban all non-animal-hunting firearms.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I'll never understand the idea of "well bad guys have (banned item), so we might as well make it legal so good guys can have (banned item) too!".
in Canada no one is allowed a hand gun, never mind conceal and carry. the idea is to make it illegal so if a bad guy is caught with it, you can do something about it, not say "hey, enjoy your right to conceal and carry around my family, gang banger! have a great afternoon!"
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
The best is when it is used by someone who has no clue on what they are talking about... in response to someone who does.
...
I like it when someone I think might be dumb... proves to me that they are actually... dumb. It's funny.
Hail, Hail!!!