NRA wants stalkers to keep their guns and kill women.

[BULLDOG]

Come on clowns. Is that the best you can come up with? When does a "dating partner" become a domestic partner? When they get married? Nope, when a freaking left wing blog site editorializes an obscure bill in a state legislature. A conviction for stalking would surely prevent the purchase of a firearm in Louisiana but the radical left would rather get tangled up in rhetoric. If the truth be known it was the liberals in Virginia that authorized a maniac to obtain weapons and commit the worst school shooting in history. Caring liberals didn't want a conviction on the record of a Va. Tech student for stalking coeds so they pulled some strings and the maniac was ordered to psychiatric counseling. The Va. instant check would still have prevented the maniac from purchasing a weapon but caring liberals decided that the privacy issue trumped public safety so the court ordered psychiatric counseling didn't come up in the instant name check. The glitch has been fixed.

And this is a stalkers friend, not enemy.....get a lawyer to file paperwork on your intended victim and claim she abused you.....then have the cops grab her guns...then kill her with a knife, gasoline, or a hatchet.........

Sounds like you've spent some time planning. I'm not surprised.

 

[OKTexas]

Nothing stops a stalker like a 9MM

Wrong, a .45 does a better job.

Two to the body, one to the head. Wont make a difference if it's a 9mm, .45, hollow point, LRN, or FMJ.

My point, .45 has a much greater shock value than a 9mm because of mass and velocity.

It doesnt matter. Once you get 12" of penetration in gelatin out of the round it's going to be effective. I've studied this for years and there are so many variables that caliber choice and bullet style are very low on the list of what makes an effective shoot.
I've carried 9s, .45s, 40s, .38s, .357s, 44s, 10mm. They all work. They all have a good record of putting bad guys down. Shot placement plus penetration is key.

Yep, but with higher calibers you can knock a bad guy down with less than optimal placement.

 

[The Rabbi]

Nothing stops a stalker like a 9MM

Wrong, a .45 does a better job.

Two to the body, one to the head. Wont make a difference if it's a 9mm, .45, hollow point, LRN, or FMJ.

My point, .45 has a much greater shock value than a 9mm because of mass and velocity.

It doesnt matter. Once you get 12" of penetration in gelatin out of the round it's going to be effective. I've studied this for years and there are so many variables that caliber choice and bullet style are very low on the list of what makes an effective shoot.
I've carried 9s, .45s, 40s, .38s, .357s, 44s, 10mm. They all work. They all have a good record of putting bad guys down. Shot placement plus penetration is key.

Yep, but with higher calibers you can knock a bad guy down with less than optimal placement.

Bullshit. No handgun round knocks anyone down. That is a myth. The physics simply doesnt support it.

 

[OKTexas]

Wrong, a .45 does a better job.

Two to the body, one to the head. Wont make a difference if it's a 9mm, .45, hollow point, LRN, or FMJ.

My point, .45 has a much greater shock value than a 9mm because of mass and velocity.

It doesnt matter. Once you get 12" of penetration in gelatin out of the round it's going to be effective. I've studied this for years and there are so many variables that caliber choice and bullet style are very low on the list of what makes an effective shoot.
I've carried 9s, .45s, 40s, .38s, .357s, 44s, 10mm. They all work. They all have a good record of putting bad guys down. Shot placement plus penetration is key.

Yep, but with higher calibers you can knock a bad guy down with less than optimal placement.

Bullshit. No handgun round knocks anyone down. That is a myth. The physics simply doesnt support it.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that one, give me a larger caliber any day.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

Is THIS what you mean by "honest debate"?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

A gun is a cure when someone means to do you harm.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

Is THIS what you mean by "honest debate"?

No, it's an opinion. The lust for violence and killing the bad guy is what people like you dream about, and some of those with violent fantasies are indiscriminate, and lack the judgment necessary to ever own, possess or have a gun in their custody and control.

I know, But, But, But The Second Amendment is a Right for all citizens, no matter what they do or what they say. End of debate, and end of rational discourse.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

Is THIS what you mean by "honest debate"?

No, it's an opinion.

Snicker...

The lust for violence and killing the bad guy is what people like you dream about....

Clearly a -dishonest- opinion as you have absolutely no supporting evidence for this.

The problem with you having an honest and open debate on gun control is that YOU have no capacity to do so.

Disagree?

There's a topic waiting for your response.
George Zimmerman back in the news: another shooting incident

 

[Wry Catcher]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

Is THIS what you mean by "honest debate"?

No, it's an opinion.

Snicker...

The lust for violence and killing the bad guy is what people like you dream about....

Clearly a -dishonest- opinion as you have absolutely no supporting evidence for this.

The problem with you having an honest and open debate on gun control is that YOU have no capacity to do so.

Disagree?

There's a topic waiting for your response.
George Zimmerman back in the news: another shooting incident

I'm certain you do.

One standard interview question, vis a vis, an interrogation is to ask the person, "have you ever thought seriously about hurting yourself or others?" Of course this question is asked after a serious of questions establishing rapport with a person of interest. After hundreds of interviews and as many interrogations I have a pretty good idea what goes on the head of others.

The follow up question after getting the expected answer is, "have you ever tried to take your own life, or take the life of another?"

 

[M14 Shooter]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

Is THIS what you mean by "honest debate"?

No, it's an opinion.

Snicker...

The lust for violence and killing the bad guy is what people like you dream about....

Clearly a -dishonest- opinion as you have absolutely no supporting evidence for this.
The problem with you having an honest and open debate on gun control is that YOU have no capacity to do so.
Disagree?
There's a topic waiting for your response.
George Zimmerman back in the news: another shooting incident

I'm certain you do.

Clearly a -dishonest- opinion as you have absolutely no supporting evidence for the idea that I "dream about" the "lust for violence and killing the bad guy "

You, on the other hand, have presented PLENTY of evidence supporting the claim that you are incapable of having an honest and open debate on gun control - if not just on this topic, but the previously cited discussion you ran away from.

The obvious question: Why do you not have the capacity to have an honest and open debate on gun control?

There's a topic waiting for your response.
George Zimmerman back in the news: another shooting incident

 

[The Rabbi]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

Is THIS what you mean by "honest debate"?

No, it's an opinion. The lust for violence and killing the bad guy is what people like you dream about, and some of those with violent fantasies are indiscriminate, and lack the judgment necessary to ever own, possess or have a gun in their custody and control.

I know, But, But, But The Second Amendment is a Right for all citizens, no matter what they do or what they say. End of debate, and end of rational discourse.

Meanwhile the desire to turn women into victims is the wet dream of the Left. Leftists are fine with dead victims. Not so much with live heroes.

 

[OKTexas]

Is there any greater argument for gun control than those who posted above? Not only is their ignorance total on the nature of and extent of Domestic Violence, but their focus on using a gun becomes the only recourse they offer, and they believe it to be a panacea; a gun is not a cure, it is a nostrum.

Is THIS what you mean by "honest debate"?

No, it's an opinion.

Snicker...

The lust for violence and killing the bad guy is what people like you dream about....

Clearly a -dishonest- opinion as you have absolutely no supporting evidence for this.

The problem with you having an honest and open debate on gun control is that YOU have no capacity to do so.

Disagree?

There's a topic waiting for your response.
George Zimmerman back in the news: another shooting incident

I'm certain you do.

One standard interview question, vis a vis, an interrogation is to ask the person, "have you ever thought seriously about hurting yourself or others?" Of course this question is asked after a serious of questions establishing rapport with a person of interest. After hundreds of interviews and as many interrogations I have a pretty good idea what goes on the head of others.

The follow up question after getting the expected answer is, "have you ever tried to take your own life, or take the life of another?"

So I guess you would want every driver who's been cut off in traffic and gets really pissed off to be deprived of gun ownership? I bet that would include you. Having a thought is not a crime.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The NRA wants Louisiana stalkers to be able to keep their guns — and women are going to keep dying

Sick, just sick.

As part of its never-ending quest to make sure that handguns are cheap, plentiful, and easy for anyone to acquire and keep, the NRA inserted itself into the writing of a Louisiana bill that would have expanded protections for victims of domestic violence.

Putting bullets before people, the NRA saw to it that people in Louisiana with a history of violence — to say nothing of a conviction for stalking — can hang onto their guns just in case they are needed to prevent government tyranny or, should the need arise, to water the Tree of Liberty with the blood of women who are tired of being beaten.

The NRA wants women to have guns to deal with the stalkers.

Louisiana’s HB 488, which would have provided additional protective measures for victims of domestic abuse, was gutted because the NRA thought it went too far when it included “dating partners” along with “household members.”

According to a member of the state domestic violence prevention commission, the NRA “didn’t want to increase the pool of people who will dispossessed of their firearms.”

So what got yanked out of the bill so it could pass through committee?

Well, they removed “dating partner” from the list of victims of domestic abuse and battery, which means domestic violence victims who don’t live with their abusive partner don’t receive the same protections. This is in a state where 50 percent of domestic violence victims qualify as “dating partners” who live apart from their abuser.

Wouldn't make a difference. In my backwards state we have a recent Constitutional amendment that provides a blanket right for all to possess firearms. Convicted felons are

The NRA wants women to have guns to deal with the stalkers.

And they want the women to die from gunshot wounds in the process.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The NRA wants women to have guns to deal with the stalkers.

And they want the women to die from gunshot wounds in the process.

^^
Another lie.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The NRA, as a good PR move should have a fund to give guns and gun training to any woman who has had an incident of domestic violence.

I think they do, though on state levels.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Nothing stops a stalker like a 9MM

Bullshit.

A load of 00 buckshot works much better.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Wrong, a .45 does a better job.

Two to the body, one to the head. Wont make a difference if it's a 9mm, .45, hollow point, LRN, or FMJ.

My point, .45 has a much greater shock value than a 9mm because of mass and velocity.

It doesnt matter. Once you get 12" of penetration in gelatin out of the round it's going to be effective. I've studied this for years and there are so many variables that caliber choice and bullet style are very low on the list of what makes an effective shoot.
I've carried 9s, .45s, 40s, .38s, .357s, 44s, 10mm. They all work. They all have a good record of putting bad guys down. Shot placement plus penetration is key.

Yep, but with higher calibers you can knock a bad guy down with less than optimal placement.

Bullshit. No handgun round knocks anyone down. That is a myth. The physics simply doesnt support it.

It does if it hits him in the head, heart, or knee.

 

[The Rabbi]

Two to the body, one to the head. Wont make a difference if it's a 9mm, .45, hollow point, LRN, or FMJ.

My point, .45 has a much greater shock value than a 9mm because of mass and velocity.

It doesnt matter. Once you get 12" of penetration in gelatin out of the round it's going to be effective. I've studied this for years and there are so many variables that caliber choice and bullet style are very low on the list of what makes an effective shoot.
I've carried 9s, .45s, 40s, .38s, .357s, 44s, 10mm. They all work. They all have a good record of putting bad guys down. Shot placement plus penetration is key.

Yep, but with higher calibers you can knock a bad guy down with less than optimal placement.

Bullshit. No handgun round knocks anyone down. That is a myth. The physics simply doesnt support it.

It does if it hits him in the head, heart, or knee.

Nope. IT still will not knock him down. Head, he will collapse depending on the hit. Heart, you still have about 5 seconds of life even with a direct hit to the heart. Knee, you'll fall over very likely.
But handguns do not have "knock down power." It's that "equal and opposite reaction" thing from physics.