St. Louis woman shoots husband dead for giving her warm beer

miller8966

Gotta love Dunkmans arguments..lol.

HunterandHunted

I like guns. Especially the shiny ones.
Great arbiter's of disagreement. I find.

Sonja_S

Do we know how old she is? The article only states the age of the husband. Can you still inherit your husband's assets if you plead temporarily insane in the US? Maybe she wanted to get rid of him creatively so she could still get his money. Or maybe I should just lay off the painkillers before I get any weirder

lalalalaaaaaaaa

dunkman1974 wrote:

you can't kill someone with a bat... it'll take years for it to suck all the blood out of a person... unless its Dracula

haha

wow

Uncle Leo

You could probably stab someone in the throat with a sharp pencil and kill them. Therefore you should be able to have an uzi.

dunkman

Uncle Leo wrote:

You could probably stab someone in the throat with a sharp pencil and kill them. Therefore you should be able to have an uzi.

i absolutely agree... and later on i'm going out to settle a grudge with a protractor

chopitdown

Uncle Leo wrote:

You could probably stab someone in the throat with a sharp pencil and kill them. Therefore you should be able to have an uzi.

no, we should ban pencils

Uncle Leo

dunkman1974 wrote:

i absolutely agree... and later on i'm going out to settle a grudge with a protractor

You COULD do that. But since you could kill someone with a protractor, may as well get a gun. Apparently your victim would have the same chance against either.

tooferz

guns are just so unoriginal. don't you get extra points if you kill with style?

dunkman

Uncle Leo wrote:

Apparently your victim would have the same chance against either.

I seriously fucking doubt that... ever tried eating a protractor? dead in 37 seconds.

also protractors are easier to get on the black market... guns dont exist in Scotland it would seem, but protractors have created a schoolboy black market... 14 year old geometry whizzes going past me on gold bikes... with big fucking swords welded to the wheels!

FinsburyParkCarrots

Ever tried doing your maths homework with a gun?

mammasan

dunkman1974 wrote:

actually you said kitchen knife... if we are talking 12foot fucking lances and chariots with huge swords welded to the wheels then maybe you have a point.

But i think you'll find that the majority of giant Samurai swords and Claymores have already been banned for safety reasons.

And you are wrong anyway.. a knife was invented to prepare the killed animal.. cut the flesh and clean the hide. Flint blades being the most obvious ancestor of a knife was designed for this very reason!

nobody hunts animals or fish with knives...

Like I said I don't like guns don't agree with civilians owning them, but I do believe in the Constitution & the Bill of Rights and people have a right to own them. I can't pick and choose what parts or amendments are ok and which one's aren't. I either support it as a whole or I don't.

Uncle Leo

mammasan wrote:

Like I said I don't like guns don't agree with civilians owning them, but I do believe in the Constitution & the Bill of Rights and people have a right to own them. I can't pick and choose what parts or amendments are ok and which one's aren't. I either support it as a whole or I don't.

Then I assume you agree that people should be able to have missle silos in their yard and tanks in their garage?

If not, then that means you are willing to draw a line somewhere (and maybe it is between handguns and automatics).

Is the right to bear arms = to the right to bear any arms of your choice? Or is there a line drawn?

soulsinging

miller8966 wrote:

Lol yes its the guns fault. Not the fact that the woman is obviously a fucking lunatic.

Good troll job though

might have been nice if that lunatic had not been able to possess a gun though. i doubt she'd have succeeded in doing this with her fists.

Uncle Leo

soulsinging wrote:

might have been nice if that lunatic had not been able to possess a gun though. i doubt she'd have succeeded in doing this with her fists.

Or even with a knife, he'd have had a fightin' chance.

soulsinging

chopitdown wrote:

debatable, both sides have good arguements. I disagree with your premise, i feel the 2nd amendment allows US citizens the opportunity to own guns.

She may be a part of a neighborhood watch program and if they are armed could they be a militia??

we do need better gun laws, but we really need to address the reasons people are doing this. I don't think guns are the impetus for the murders, there is something wrong with the PEOPLE who use them in this manner (except this case...really, a WARM STAG beer? come now.) And you can't legislate sanity or good decisions, you can only punish insanity and bad decisions. So we're back where we started. Guns aren't going anywhere, there's too many of them. If honest people turn in all guns, the only people who have them are criminals. Prohibition doesn't work. We need to figure out why our society is so damn intent on using guns in this manner.

yes, there will be a lag. but as police confiscate some, some break down from poor care, some are lost, etc, the numbers would even out. right now we're keeping a fresh IV of cheap, deadly weapons flowing into our urban streets and to deny that that plays HUGE part in the fact that we have the most dangerous large cities in the world is insane.

Uncle Leo

soulsinging wrote:

yes, there will be a lag. but as police confiscate some, some break down from poor care, some are lost, etc, the numbers would even out. right now we're keeping a fresh IV of cheap, deadly weapons flowing into our urban streets and to deny that that plays HUGE part in the fact that we have the most dangerous large cities in the world is insane.

...through attrition as they say...

miller8966

If you limit guns than you should limit freedom of speech

Uncle Leo

miller8966 wrote:

If you limit guns than you should limit freedom of speech

Should you be able to have a tank or a nuclear missle? Some people have huge property and could probably afford it. Conventional missle anyway.

mammasan

Uncle Leo wrote:

Then I assume you agree that people should be able to have missle silos in their yard and tanks in their garage?

If not, then that means you are willing to draw a line somewhere (and maybe it is between handguns and automatics).

Is the right to bear arms = to the right to bear any arms of your choice? Or is there a line drawn?

I believe a line should be drawn. Hunting rifles and hand guns should be allowed but there is definetly no need for people to have an arsenal of full automatic weapons. You are not going to use an AK-47 or an UZI to hunt dear. Like I said I don't like them but their arepeople out there who are responsible adults and they should have the right to own a gun if they so please. I do believe that prior to getting your permit, I don't know if this is already in place, you should have to attend a fire arms safety course to educate yourself on the safe handling and storage of these weapons and of course an in-depth back ground check. A psycholigical examination wouldn't hurt either.