Father with his daughter uses his legal gun to fight off 4 robbers. 4 to 1 and the good guy won...

[MrShangles]

One of the experts on tv today was talking about who you need to worry about committing these mass shootings, are those that talk about guns ALL the time.

Only morons spend their days worrying about mass shootings while ignoring the real driver of violent crime: blacks and latinos.

The real driver of crimes is poverty which is an objective of the Republican Party.

We need more handouts, cause some folks don’t have to work


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gipper]

Liar. Criminals drive crime.

Corporate America is far worse than the Mob and Republicans promote Corporate America.

Well...at least you are half right with this post. So, that is an improvement.

Ds promote Corporate America at least as much as the Rs. Failing to see this, merely makes you just another duped partisan.

Hell...Big Ears was nothing if not a corporatist, but partisans can't see the truth.

Yeah. Only he was special because he was a corporatist while, at the same time, anti-business and anti-free market. Weeeeeeee!

Yeah...if you really believe that, you need your head examined.

Obama was all about PROTECTING the extreme wealthy and the big corporations.

OBAMA'S RESUME....
Who bailed out huge corporations and left poor and middle class people in the lurch?
Who signed into a law a HC plan purposely designed to protect big health care and big pharma?
Who, after leaving office, took huge speaking fees from Wall Street?
etc.......................................................................................................................................................................

Come on man! What about all those business killing and job killing regulations?!?!

Well there was that, but those regulations only really applied to businesses not in the club. You know...Those smaller businesses without the means to buy protection from the a tyrannical central government. It is a racket the Mafia can only dream of.

I suspect you being you, you don't know that Big Business LOVES regulations...it protects them from competition. I just taught another fact...yet again. It does get tiring...I must say.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Corporate America is far worse than the Mob and Republicans promote Corporate America.

Well...at least you are half right with this post. So, that is an improvement.

Ds promote Corporate America at least as much as the Rs. Failing to see this, merely makes you just another duped partisan.

Hell...Big Ears was nothing if not a corporatist, but partisans can't see the truth.

Yeah. Only he was special because he was a corporatist while, at the same time, anti-business and anti-free market. Weeeeeeee!

Yeah...if you really believe that, you need your head examined.

Obama was all about PROTECTING the extreme wealthy and the big corporations.

OBAMA'S RESUME....
Who bailed out huge corporations and left poor and middle class people in the lurch?
Who signed into a law a HC plan purposely designed to protect big health care and big pharma?
Who, after leaving office, took huge speaking fees from Wall Street?
etc.......................................................................................................................................................................

Come on man! What about all those business killing and job killing regulations?!?!

Well there was that, but those regulations only really applied to businesses not in the club. You know...Those smaller businesses without the means to buy protection from the a tyrannical central government. It is a racket the Mafia can only dream of.

I suspect you being you, you don't know that Big Business LOVES regulations...it protects them from competition. I just taught another fact...yet again. It does get tiring...I must say.

Have your cake and eat it too, guy. It's how you roll.

 

[August West]

And here we have one of 2.4 million defensive gun uses each year....according to the CDc.......

These criminals will now be rounded up thanks to this law abiding gun owner....

Father Attacked at McDonald's While Holding Infant Daughter, Shoots One of Four Suspects

A father who was attacked in Memphis, Tennessee, McDonald’s while holding his infant daughter was able to get his gun and open fire, wounding one of the four attackers.
WREG quotes police saying “four suspects attempted to rob the victim at the McDonald’s in the 1400 block of South Trezevant near Lamar and Airways.” A witness described a scene in which the suspects tried to catch the father while he was too busy to fight back.

Witness David Chase said, “They jumped out of the car and they started fighting him and trying to take his wallet and stuff.” He added, “He was fighting them. He dropped his baby and started fighting them and the child was just sitting on the concrete.”

Chase then heard gunshots rang out and the suspects fled the scene. It was later learned that the father had managed to get to his gun and fire the shots, wounding one of the suspects.

ActionNews5 reports that the wounded suspect “showed up later at a nearby fire department” for treatment. His was taken to a hospital in “non-critical condition.”

According to your BS statistics there were 8,000 defensive gun uses on that day but you can only show evidence of one (1)

 

[sealybobo]

One of the experts on tv today was talking about who you need to worry about committing these mass shootings, are those that talk about guns ALL the time.

My brother had a guy freak out when a friend and co worker killed himself. The way he acted and things he said made my brother fire him.

His mother also works there and admitted afterward that he recently asked her to get all his “toys” out of the house. This man should not be allowed to own guns. Mom should turn him in. And if she doesn’t then she’s negligible

 

[sealybobo]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

 

[Pop23]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

Thank you for reminding us all that the second amendment is there to insure the first amendment is never abandoned

 

[airplanemechanic]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

So exercising your first amendment rights should cause you to lose your 2nd?

Wow. The liberal party is very proud of you.

 

[blastoff]

One of the experts on tv today was talking about who you need to worry about committing these mass shootings, are those that talk about guns ALL the time.

Only morons spend their days worrying about mass shootings while ignoring the real driver of violent crime: blacks and latinos.

The real driver of crimes is poverty which is an objective of the Republican Party.

Interesting theory. So negroes murder each other because they are poor? Could you explain the theory behind that? What is the profit motive behind killing some local negro, getting locked up for a decade or two, and then being rightly unable to find a job?

Um...they make it up in volume.

 

[sealybobo]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

Thank you for reminding us all that the second amendment is there to insure the first amendment is never abandoned

Well if you’re a gun nut talking about your guns at work you can be fired and no second amendment will save you.

Remember at will employers don’t have to give a reason and you have no right to your job

 

[sealybobo]

Yo

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

So exercising your first amendment rights should cause you to lose your 2nd?

Wow. The liberal party is very proud of you.

u can exercise your 2nd all you want.

Are you republicans suggesting you have a right to your job?

What amendment gives you the right to your job?

 

[Pop23]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

Thank you for reminding us all that the second amendment is there to insure the first amendment is never abandoned

Well if you’re a gun nut talking about your guns at work you can be fired and no second amendment will save you.

Remember at will employers don’t have to give a reason and you have no right to your job

Stupid posts to save face are still stupid, and make you look even stupider.

 

[sealybobo]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

So exercising your first amendment rights should cause you to lose your 2nd?

Wow. The liberal party is very proud of you.

Corporate America is conservative just not when it comes to guns

 

[sealybobo]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

Thank you for reminding us all that the second amendment is there to insure the first amendment is never abandoned

Well if you’re a gun nut talking about your guns at work you can be fired and no second amendment will save you.

Remember at will employers don’t have to give a reason and you have no right to your job

Stupid posts to save face are still stupid, and make you look even stupider.

You don’t understand?

 

[Pilot1]

u can exercise your 2nd all you want.

Gee thanks!

Are you republicans suggesting you have a right to your job?

What amendment gives you the right to your job?

Who is saying we have a right to our jobs? Also, neither government, nor amendments grant rights anyway. They just protect them from government taking them away.
Also, corporate America I largely liberal, progressive, and extremely PC.

 

[sealybobo]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

So exercising your first amendment rights should cause you to lose your 2nd?

Wow. The liberal party is very proud of you.

Are you saying if you get fired for talking stupid at work you’ll shoot someone? That’s how I interpreted your comment

 

[sealybobo]

People who talk about their guns a lot should lose them

Thank you for reminding us all that the second amendment is there to insure the first amendment is never abandoned

Well if you’re a gun nut talking about your guns at work you can be fired and no second amendment will save you.

Remember at will employers don’t have to give a reason and you have no right to your job

Stupid posts to save face are still stupid, and make you look even stupider.

You don’t understand?

I understand. You're stupid. That was easy.

I said this: Well if you’re a gun nut talking about your guns at work you can be fired and no second amendment will save you.

Remember at will employers don’t have to give a reason and you have no right to your job

And you came back with basically nothing. You're a conversation killer.

You know what? I tested this theory on my republican friend here at work. You guys are so fucking brainwashed. He couldn't even agree that corporations are conservative. Like you guys he started talking about how their advertisements always make fun of the white guy and them being politically correct.

Well no shit dummies. They aren't going to be blatantly conservative because they know being conservative is unpopular and it will hurt their business'.

What didn't you agree with? You don't have free speech at work to talk about your guns. If you even make people nervous, you can be fired. Do you disagree with that? Then shut the fuck up.

And do you agree you have no right to your job? Isn't that what Republicans pushed? Right to work states means you have no right to your job. It's anti union. If I'm mistaken tell me how. Just please don't come back with nothing like you did the last time. I'll remind you of what you replied the last time.

YOU SAID I understand. You're stupid. That was easy. That doesn't debunk or disagree with anything I said. Chances are I just made a stupid person (you) uncomfortable. Probably cognitive dissonance kicking in.

 

[flacaltenn]

Awesome. That is one of SIX THOUSAND defensive gun uses yesterday. Only 5,999 more news reports to go through.

I’m ready. Post away moron.

Since most defensive gun uses don't make it into the press...since most defensive gun uses do not involve having to shoot the moron trying to rape, rob or murder the victim/victims since the criminals run away, surrender or are simply wounded....we have to go by the extensive amount of research into defensive gun use to get an idea at how often it happens...

so here.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

CDC...1996-1998... 2.46 million each of those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

As one poster pointed out -- The 2Mill numbers defy reason, because that's nearly 5500 per day. It's best to give the COMPLETE range because of the uncertainties. I have no doubt the number is above 100,000, but not by much.. You CANNOT ever show 5500 defensive gun uses per day unless they're counting proprietors openly carrying or displaying "armed response" signs.

 

[2aguy]

Awesome. That is one of SIX THOUSAND defensive gun uses yesterday. Only 5,999 more news reports to go through.

I’m ready. Post away moron.

Since most defensive gun uses don't make it into the press...since most defensive gun uses do not involve having to shoot the moron trying to rape, rob or murder the victim/victims since the criminals run away, surrender or are simply wounded....we have to go by the extensive amount of research into defensive gun use to get an idea at how often it happens...

so here.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

CDC...1996-1998... 2.46 million each of those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

As one poster pointed out -- The 2Mill numbers defy reason, because that's nearly 5500 per day. It's best to give the COMPLETE range because of the uncertainties. I have no doubt the number is above 100,000, but not by much.. You CANNOT ever show 5500 defensive gun uses per day unless they're counting proprietors openly carrying or displaying "armed response" signs.

Those 16 studies say you are wrong......

 

[2aguy]

Thank you for reminding us all that the second amendment is there to insure the first amendment is never abandoned

Well if you’re a gun nut talking about your guns at work you can be fired and no second amendment will save you.

Remember at will employers don’t have to give a reason and you have no right to your job

Stupid posts to save face are still stupid, and make you look even stupider.

You don’t understand?

I understand. You're stupid. That was easy.

I said this: Well if you’re a gun nut talking about your guns at work you can be fired and no second amendment will save you.

Remember at will employers don’t have to give a reason and you have no right to your job

And you came back with basically nothing. You're a conversation killer.

You know what? I tested this theory on my republican friend here at work. You guys are so fucking brainwashed. He couldn't even agree that corporations are conservative. Like you guys he started talking about how their advertisements always make fun of the white guy and them being politically correct.

Well no shit dummies. They aren't going to be blatantly conservative because they know being conservative is unpopular and it will hurt their business'.

What didn't you agree with? You don't have free speech at work to talk about your guns. If you even make people nervous, you can be fired. Do you disagree with that? Then shut the fuck up.

And do you agree you have no right to your job? Isn't that what Republicans pushed? Right to work states means you have no right to your job. It's anti union. If I'm mistaken tell me how. Just please don't come back with nothing like you did the last time. I'll remind you of what you replied the last time.

YOU SAID I understand. You're stupid. That was easy. That doesn't debunk or disagree with anything I said. Chances are I just made a stupid person (you) uncomfortable. Probably cognitive dissonance kicking in.

He couldn't even agree that corporations are conservative.

Which corporations are conservative.....? At best, corporations are neutral, but the majority are running to the left..with the wealthiest completely left.......