Defensive use of guns.

Where is your reference ? I had one. Yours is just made up shit. All rights are qualified.
You have not supported your claim that there is not a single right that does not have qualifications and/or fess required as a condition of exercising that right.

When you do we can continue
 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...


And I showed you exactly what happens......the criminals tend to run away......

What you fail to understand is if 3 criminals approach you and you don't have a gun, they can do whatever they want to you for as long as they want....cause you are defenseless........

And as more and more British criminals take to using guns, you will begin to understand this....
 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...


And here we have the first example. that you ignored in the other thread...

 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...


Example #2.....new video....4 attackers....driven off by armed home owner...

 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...


Example #3 that you ignored from the other thread.....a woman with a gun vs. 3 home invaders all armed with their own guns....they run away....

 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...

Most armed criminals who commit crimes, like the scumbags I encountered, don't expect their targets to be armed and willing to defend themselves.

Not drawing my weapon would've resulted in the same result.

Sorry, but I fight back...
 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...


Uber Eats driver in actual event according to your scenario...

 
I bet nobody tried to rape these women:

1664730652258.png
 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...


See...you dipstick.......criminals, even armed with guns....don't want to get shot. Even if they are wounded, it leads to complications in their lives that they don't want. They would have to get medical treatment, they may even die. So an armed citizen with a gun that points the gun at them is a threat that most criminals don't want to deal with, especially since there are so many other unarmed victims they can violate.

So....if 3 thugs come towards you pointing guns at you and you reach for your gun, they usually stop the attack and run away, and then go look for people like you....unarmed people who are much easier to victimize.....

 
OK, so three thugs come towards you pointing guns at you; you reach for your gun, they see you do so and open fire...oh, dear.
Another Saturday night firefight makes the local news...


So....this guy starts the encounter with a guy pointing a gun at him.....you know a thug pointing a gun......and he then draws his own gun and the robber runs away.....

 
I'm astonished that American domestic doors are so easy to kick in. Then again, maybe not.
Uber Eats driver in actual event according to your scenario...
Yes, dodgy bit of propaganda, there was no indication the muggers were armed in the video and once they turn and run, you'd be in legal difficulty in the UK as shooting people in the back is not considered self defence.
 
I'm astonished that American domestic doors are so easy to kick in. Then again, maybe not.

Yes, dodgy bit of propaganda, there was no indication the muggers were armed in the video and once they turn and run, you'd be in legal difficulty in the UK as shooting people in the back is not considered self defence.


Yes.......play that game. 3 violent attackers, and you want to play armed or not armed? Again, you are an idiot.
 
You have not supported your claim that there is not a single right that does not have qualifications and/or fess required as a condition of exercising that right.

When you do we can continue
When you make sense. Staggering babble…
 
You have not supported your claim that there is not a single right that does not have qualifications and/or fess required as a condition of exercising that right.

When you do we can continue

Heller, stupid. We can play this game all day, bozo.
“The Second Amendment right is not unlimited. We do not cast doubt on concealed-weapons prohibitions, laws barring possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, laws barring firearms in sensitive places like schools and government buildings, and laws imposing conditions on commercial sale of arms.”
  • Freedom of Speech and of Press. The government can’t stop people from expressing their opinions. This means you can say what you think without government “censorship” or punishment. These protections apply to verbal and written speech. They also apply to other activities that courts have decided are “speech.” But, there are certain limitations on this right, too:
    • Imminent Violence. The government can limit speech that incites immediate violence.
    • True Threats. The government can also stop you from making “true threats” of violence.
    • Defamation. The First Amendment also does not protect defamatory statements. These are false statements that harm someone’s reputation or character.
    • Obscenity. The First Amendment does not protect bscene materials either. Examples include abusive or offensive materials.
 
Wrong.

And there you go again trying to sneak in restrictions because you can't list any so called qualifications or fees involved that are required to exercise any right
Look up the meaning of qualify idiot.
 
Wrong.

And there you go again trying to sneak in restrictions because you can't list any so called qualifications or fees involved that are required to exercise any right
10 years can’t vote stupid.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top