The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on January 07, 2013, 08:32:16 AM
-
Skip Intro (17,397 posts)
Mother shoots home intruder...after he cornered her in attic with her twins, 9
Just got online and didn't see this posted anywhere. Sorry if it is a dupe.
Mother shoots home intruder five times in face and neck after he cornered her in attic with her twins, 9
--snip--
Warren DeMontague (42,533 posts)
1. Amazing, she was able to do it with 6 shots, and no 30 round clips or bushmaster 223.
Of course, those weapons are needed to PRUHTECT US FERM TH GUBNERNMENT AN OBAMERS NEW WER!D ORDER COMNIST HURLICOPTERS DERP DERP
The Bushmaster never went into Sandy Hook.
Lanza did what he did with the same weapon type the mother used.
hack89 (18,245 posts)
2. Does the NRA pay you post such inflamitory drivel?
because people like you are making things a lot easier for them.
Warren DeMontague (42,533 posts)
9. Must have hit a nerve, huh.
Last edited Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:24 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
Anyway, I'm on MIRT, and I can tell you that "drivel" is pretty damn close to a direct summary of the arguments used by the gun troll troglodytes filing in through the door this past week, outraged - OUTRAGED!- that, in the wake of 20 little kids being brutally shot with an assault rifle, anyone would dare suggest even the tiniest legislative restrictions on their ability to own and fondle THE PRECIOUS....
Know what? If owning a big ****ing gun is more important to someone than showing a little ****ING RESPECT to the families if these dead kids, they are an ASSHOLE.
(http://mastersdust.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/respect-my-authority.jpg)
hack89 (18,245 posts)
16. When gun control fails one more time
and you are looking for a reason, take a peek in the mirror. This is a serious matter that requires some maturity. Extremist like yourself do your side no good because at the end of the day you will not pass any meaningful legislation without the support of gun owners. Juvenile insults and petty tantrums are not the way to gain that support.
You are not interested in serious discussion - you demand capitulation. Well it ain't going to happen so grow up and contribute in a meaningful way.
Warren DeMontague (42,533 posts)
18. No, Im saying that no one needs a ****ing bushmaster 223 to hunt or for self defense.
Last edited Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:39 PM USA/ET - Edit history (3)
We know what "reasonable" is to the NRA crowd: just arm everyone so it can be high noon at the OK Corral, all the time.
Im damn reasonable. I want those ****ing assault weapons outlawed. I want the high capacity clips outlawed. And no, im not going to play the old gungeon game of "theres no difference derp derp no such thing as an assault wepon derp derp you wanna ban some guns just cuz they look scary derp derp"
if there is really "no difference" between, say, a bushmaster 223 and a .38 revolver, or a hunting rifle that needs to be reloaded after every shot... Then why do the gun crazies -and, yes, they say this- claim they "need" AR-15s to "protect against government tyranny"?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022144871
WD says you have a inviolable, constitutional right to produce and/or view porn of any variety even porn that depicts rape. I'm not anti-porn (except rape porn, bestiality, etc) but why is he allowed to defend something that has ZERO practical social value but yet he denies people even the right to defend their own positions with facts. In his world you have a 1A right to rape porn but you don't even have a 1A right to defend the 2A.
This is how liberalism works. This is why so many of our laws and judicial rulings violate the COTUS.
This is why debate is pointless.
Take what you want from them. There are none strong enough to resist you. There are none Just enough to judge you.
-
The Bushmaster never went into Sandy Hook.
This is why debate is pointless.
You'll never hear them admit they AR didn't go into the school.
You're absolutely correct. You can never debate the anti gun side. They refuse to get educated and when approached with the facts act like 3 year olds. "Derp, derp"
:whatever:
KC
-
You'll never hear them admit they AR didn't go into the school.
You're absolutely correct. You can never debate the anti gun side. They refuse to get educated and when approached with the facts act like 3 year olds. "Derp, derp"
:whatever:
KC
The AR couldn't go into the school it would have to be taken in.
-
The AR couldn't go into the school it would have to be taken in.
I think what he means is this: The AR was used to shoot through the door/glass on the door, then Lanza returned it to the car and used the Sig and Glock.
-
The AR couldn't go into the school it would have to be taken in.
True. BSB said it better than I could have. I didn't/don't even know if the AR was used to get through the door. So much confusing information floating around on that act of terrorism.
KC
-
I was reading about this article on the DailyMailUK and you wouldn't believe all the comments from residents of the UK saying things like "If this had happened over here we would be charged", and "We would have been killed or raped begging the burglar to please not hurt us". This does show that we should have the right to defend ourselves.
-
I think what he means is this: The AR was used to shoot through the door/glass on the door, then Lanza returned it to the car and used the Sig and Glock.
I haven't read that anywhere, is that true? link?
-
Warren DeMontague (42,533 posts)
1. Amazing, she was able to do it with 6 shots, and no 30 round clips or bushmaster 223.
Of course, those weapons are needed to PRUHTECT US FERM TH GUBNERNMENT AN OBAMERS NEW WER!D ORDER COMNIST HURLICOPTERS DERP DERP
Hey, DUmbass, check this out:
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
- George Washington
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
- Thomas Jefferson
So, do your little immature "derp derp" With these, idiot. It's not a new phenomenon. We, as a country, were founded on the predication that people have the right to govern themselves, and that government is there for just essential duties.
If it ever comes to the point where these types of weapons are needed, stay home. Don't come looking for those of us. We'll laugh at your sorry butt and tell you you're SOL.
-
A little respect for the families eh? I'm sure the anti gun nut is staunchly advocating restricting the rights of the seriously mentally ill too out of 'respect'. Right? Right? Crickets...
-
I haven't read that anywhere, is that true? link?
I don't have the link--I did read it fairly early in the coverage, and it was buried among the other aspects of the shooting. But, mention of it has strangely disappeared from the public discussion. ::)
-
WD says you have a inviolable, constitutional right to produce and/or view porn of any variety even porn that depicts rape. I'm not anti-porn (except rape porn, bestiality, etc) but why is he allowed to defend something that has ZERO practical social value but yet he denies people even the right to defend their own positions with facts. In his world you have a 1A right to rape porn but you don't even have a 1A right to defend the 2A.
You can use any facts you want so long as they are not from the NRA. Of course, any fact you bring up to refute his he will say is from the NRA. ::)
-
**** him and the left. They want to take them then come get them. Don't be pissed off when you lose .
-
Warren DeMontague (42,533 posts)
9. Must have hit a nerve, huh.
Last edited Sun Jan 6, 2013, 08:24 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
Anyway, I'm on MIRT, and I can tell you that "drivel" is pretty damn close to a direct summary of the arguments used by the gun troll troglodytes filing in through the door this past week, outraged - OUTRAGED!- that, in the wake of 20 little kids being brutally shot with an assault rifle, anyone would dare suggest even the tiniest legislative restrictions on their ability to own and fondle THE PRECIOUS....
Know what? If owning a big ****ing gun is more important to someone than showing a little ****ING RESPECT to the families if these dead kids, they are an ASSHOLE.
Not just outraged. OUTRAGED!
Are you OUTRAGED! at the millions to billions of little kids that you and your ilk have murdered before they even took their first breath? Until you can answer yes to that question your faux outrage is meaningless. Until then the evidence shows that you don't give a damn about kids. You just care about your lame-ass liberal talking points.
As for your time on MIRT, you're useless. There's one DU mole who laughs at you at like the funny little twerp you are. I don't agree with what he posts to fool you fools, but he's right that you're too stupid to catch him. He's a pubber to he's probably sitting in the pub right now laughing at you throwing your MIRT status around like it means something.
-
Warren DeMontague (42,533 posts)
...
Of course, those weapons are needed to PRUHTECT US FERM TH GUBNERNMENT AN OBAMERS NEW WER!D ORDER COMNIST HURLICOPTERS DERP DERP
Frank J. of IMAO provides a link to:
When the governmental nannies tell us that a Big Gulp is just too much Pepsi, that cigarettes must be banned or that fast food is not heart friendly, they tell us they are doing it for our own good. We will be happier if we just give in to their hectoring. Taken to its logical extreme, however, the Nanny State will not tolerate your disobedience. During Prohibition, the Nanny State was a killer.
Frustrated that people continued to consume so much alcohol even after it was banned, federal officials had decided to try a different kind of enforcement. They ordered the poisoning of industrial alcohols manufactured in the United States, products regularly stolen by bootleggers and resold as drinkable spirits. The idea was to scare people into giving up illicit drinking. Instead, by the time Prohibition ended in 1933, the federal poisoning program, by some estimates, had killed at least 10,000 people.
Although mostly forgotten today, the “chemist’s war of Prohibition†remains one of the strangest and most deadly decisions in American law-enforcement history. As one of its most outspoken opponents, Charles Norris, the chief medical examiner of New York City during the 1920s, liked to say, it was “our national experiment in extermination.â€
The state will poison gin to help you be a teetotaler. The state will ship weapons to Mexican drug lords to teach you about the danger of gun violence. It will dump Agent Orange on you and tell you it is safe. It will infect you with syphilis just to see what it does to you. It will test hallucinogenic narcotics on you and never tell you what it is doing.
But by all means, trust the government when it tells you giving up your guns will make you safer.
http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=90737