Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes it is a 2nd Amendment issue. The fact that a mentally unstable person had the "right" to arm himself is a 2A issue. The fact that there are more controls on hairdressers in this country than there are on gun owners is a 2A issue. The fact that organizations like the NRA would rather see thousands die each year than accept reasonable regulations on firearms is a 2A issue.
Kind of like Democrats not caring about the thousands of minorities who die every year due to gun violence by illegal guns as long as they keep these minority voters believing they care about them due to the welfare programs.....
Learn to think for yourself girl...many people and organizations exploit and hurt others to push agenda..... rather than single one out as a scapegoat, why not hold them all accountable
Read my post above on why this is a 2A issue. By enabling his possession of firearms, you share the blood of his victims on your hands. When you talk about how the 2A protects you from "government tyranny", the reality is some angry old coot hole'd up in a bunker hiding behind a child.
'
OMG, you've got to be kidding me.
Your tax dollars go to pay for roads and highways. When someone abuses those roads and kills someone in a wreck, are you responsible?
My hat's off to the law enforcement agencies who rescued this precious child. What a tense, tricky operation it had to have been.
By the way, the "redneck dirtbag" was NOT exercising his 2A rights when he murdered and kidnapped others. Those actions are not protected by the Second Amendment. I can't believe I even have to clarify this for anyone.
Thanks to the 2A he had a weapon, despite mental instability, having taken shots at his neighbors before, and even killing a dog. At what point would you consider it would have been prudent to disarm him? Before two people were dead and child got dragged into it?
You sound like you have more of an anger management issue than the old kook did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoke_Jaguar4
Read my post above on why this is a 2A issue. By enabling his possession of firearms, you share the blood of his victims on your hands. When you talk about how the 2A protects you from "government tyranny", the reality is some angry old coot hole'd up in a bunker hiding behind a child.
Thanks to the 2A he had a weapon, despite mental instability, having taken shots at his neighbors before, and even killing a dog. At what point would you consider it would have been prudent to disarm him? Before two people were dead and child got dragged into it?
Yes, the guy was a scumbag, no gun laws would have kept him from getting a gun though
Maybe he could have been held under mental health laws due to erratic behavior earlier..... by the Libs call mental health and sanitariums... "inhumane"
My hat's off to the law enforcement agencies who rescued this precious child. What a tense, tricky operation it had to have been.
By the way, the "redneck dirtbag" was NOT exercising his 2A rights when he murdered and kidnapped others. Those actions are not protected by the Second Amendment. I can't believe I even have to clarify this for anyone.
You sound like you have more of an anger management issue than the old kook did.
LOL. No kidding. This had nothing to do with anyone asserting their 2nd amendment rights, instead, the OP took what thankfully did not turn into a tragedy and inserted his own selfish narrative like a typical troll.
Read my post above on why this is a 2A issue. By enabling his possession of firearms, you share the blood of his victims on your hands. When you talk about how the 2A protects you from "government tyranny", the reality is some angry old coot hole'd up in a bunker hiding behind a child.
Well I can see that any further attempt to have an intelligent discussion of the 2nd amendment with you would be fruitless. Maybe you should try and learn a little more about a topic before you put it out for everyone to see.
Thanks to the 2A he had a weapon, despite mental instability, having taken shots at his neighbors before, and even killing a dog. At what point would you consider it would have been prudent to disarm him? Before two people were dead and child got dragged into it?
Coupla points.
1. He killed a dog with a LEAD PIPE. He didn't need a gun to be a complete lunatic - or to kill.
2. I think it would have been prudent to prevent him from purchasing guns legally because of his mental illness issues, which is why I support the idea of a national database of those with mental illnesses which would prohibit them from owning or purchasing firearms. However, I am not so naive to assume that just because it's illegal to purchase a gun, that people actually pay attention to such niceties.
Also - I'd like to know if the neighbor pressed charges against him when he shot in their direction. It is already illegal for felons to own or purchase guns.
Not that that stops them. Felons and the mentally ill aren't famous for their rigorous adherence to the law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
