Let's end this part of the gun debate

The anti gun people argues that if the public is armed people will get killed
I have never heard of someone going to a place to rob it and someone else is there with a gun and their ends up a shoot out and a innocent bystander getting shot by the person who was their trying to shoot the bad guy who was trying to rob the place.
Why is it that when someone who is legally armed ends up and kills the bad guy no one else is killed?
But only when the bad guy has a gun others get killed?

You come across as one of those right wing nutcases with an arsenal of weapons, walking around with an itchy trigger finger waiting for the moment you can smoke someone, so can you be called a "hero" :eusa_hand:

That was George Zimmerman's problem. There are too many idiots that want attention.

Exactly. There are far too many idiots walking around waiting for an excuse to shoot someone because they want to feel like some kind of hero for doing so.
Engaging in deadly force should only be used in an absolute last resort, life or death, absoutly no other option scenario, not waiting for the moment to "stand your ground" allowing you to do so,...
 
Last edited:
He was involved in a shoot out? Funny I hadn't read that. Zimmerman claims self defense by the way and his injuries and eye witness testimony seem to support his version of events.

Martin was killed by a vigilante. Pretty simple, really.

I assume you're a lefty that demans equal protection under the law and innocent until proven guilty. Is that correct or am I mistaken?
Protection or not, innocent or not, doesn't change the fact that Martin was killed by a vigilante.
 
Tell that to Trayvon Martin.

He was involved in a shoot out? Funny I hadn't read that. Zimmerman claims self defense by the way and his injuries and eye witness testimony seem to support his version of events.

Martin was killed by a vigilante. Pretty simple, really.

Actually he was not. And there is no evidence that supports that claim. Unless you are claiming anyone on a neighborhood watch program is a vigilante.
 
You come across as one of those right wing nutcases with an arsenal of weapons, walking around with an itchy trigger finger waiting for the moment you can smoke someone, so can you be called a "hero" :eusa_hand:

That was George Zimmerman's problem. There are too many idiots that want attention.

Exactly. There are far too many idiots walking around waiting for an excuse to shoot someone because they want to feel like some kind of hero for doing so.
Engaging in deadly force should only be used in an absolute last resort, life or death, absoutly no other option scenario, not waiting for the moment to "stand your ground" allowing you to do so,...

Bullshit. Responsible citizens understand that defending liberty of themselves, thier friends, family...and even fellow citizens is a HUGE responsibility.

YOU wish to give the responsibility to a government that could care less about YOU.

FAIL.:eusa_hand:
 
If some idiot sets off an atomic bomb in the USA, should we get rid of all of our atomic weapons?

If some idiot sets off an atomic bomb in the US, ol' bessie your rifle, your food insurance, nor beck books will save you.

I'm just using lefty reasoning. Some insane person shoots people so we need stronger gun control. Is some insane person sets off an atomic bomb, does that mean we need stricter controls on atomic weapons?

Iran/N. Korea/al-Queada/Radical Islam for another thread...:eusa_whistle:
 
He was involved in a shoot out? Funny I hadn't read that. Zimmerman claims self defense by the way and his injuries and eye witness testimony seem to support his version of events.

Martin was killed by a vigilante. Pretty simple, really.

Actually he was not. And there is no evidence that supports that claim. Unless you are claiming anyone on a neighborhood watch program is a vigilante.
If Zimmerman hadn't had a gun Martin would be alive. Neighborhood Watch members are normally discouraged from carrying guns because it is simply too easy for them to become the judge, jury and executioner.
 
You come across as one of those right wing nutcases with an arsenal of weapons, walking around with an itchy trigger finger waiting for the moment you can smoke someone, so can you be called a "hero" :eusa_hand:

That was George Zimmerman's problem. There are too many idiots that want attention.

Exactly. There are far too many idiots walking around waiting for an excuse to shoot someone because they want to feel like some kind of hero for doing so.
Engaging in deadly force should only be used in an absolute last resort, life or death, absoutly no other option scenario, not waiting for the moment to "stand your ground" allowing you to do so,...

Sure are a lot of so-called rational people who claim to defend the innocent until proven guilty finding Zimmerman guilty before his trial. Do you find that kinda weird?
 
Martin was killed by a vigilante. Pretty simple, really.

Actually he was not. And there is no evidence that supports that claim. Unless you are claiming anyone on a neighborhood watch program is a vigilante.
If Zimmerman hadn't had a gun Martin would be alive. Neighborhood Watch members are normally discouraged from carrying guns because it is simply too easy for them to become the judge, jury and executioner.

Martin should have minded his own business and never attacked Zimmerman.
 
The anti gun people argues that if the public is armed people will get killed
I have never heard of someone going to a place to rob it and someone else is there with a gun and their ends up a shoot out and a innocent bystander getting shot by the person who was their trying to shoot the bad guy who was trying to rob the place.
Why is it that when someone who is legally armed ends up and kills the bad guy no one else is killed?
But only when the bad guy has a gun others get killed?

Try again when you're sober. And keep your guns locked up until you are.

:thup:

Why dont you add something of substance to a thread once in a while?
 
The anti gun people argues that if the public is armed people will get killed
I have never heard of someone going to a place to rob it and someone else is there with a gun and their ends up a shoot out and a innocent bystander getting shot by the person who was their trying to shoot the bad guy who was trying to rob the place.
Why is it that when someone who is legally armed ends up and kills the bad guy no one else is killed?
But only when the bad guy has a gun others get killed?

Try again when you're sober. And keep your guns locked up until you are.

:thup:

Why dont you add something of substance to a thread once in a while?

You might as well ask a donkey to recite the Gettysburg Address.
 
Too bad Zimmerman isn't a muslim. He'd have every left wing victim chaser at his door volunteering to defend him and demonizing Martin as an Islamophobe.
 
I have never heard of someone going to a place to rob it and someone else is there with a gun and their ends up a shoot out and a innocent bystander getting shot by the person who was their trying to shoot the bad guy who was trying to rob the place.

You haven't heard enough then.
 
Sure are a lot of so-called rational people who claim to defend the innocent until proven guilty finding Zimmerman guilty before his trial. Do you find that kinda weird?

Martin should have minded his own business and never attacked Zimmerman.

You should take your own advice,...

Go fuck yourself, loser.

And there it is!!! You cannot defend your point of view so you lash out with a childish insult. I think you are the loser here.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top