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.
This picture is from Kathy Perkins from Armed Mom With Guns in January at a Girl Scout Cookie Sale in Texas. Does anyone see a problem here with two people holding AR-15 in front of the young girl scouts?. I doubt it.
Here is the same Kathy Perkins posting on face book with a picture of the President commenting "where is an assassin when you need one". Responsible people with guns until they become irresponsible people with guns.
I can't help but notice the smiles on the little girls faces.. It seems to me, they are perfectly content inn the situation they are in. It also seems to me, that you are more terrified than they are.
Yes, it was the firearm's fault that its user picked it up and decided to take his/her own life or go out and kill a bunch of people with it. But yet the dog is always given a pass, the owner should have known better, should have taught it better. Can someone explain this to me?
The fact that you CAN pick up a firearm and kill yourself and a bunch of people with it answers your question. You can't do that with say a marshmallow.
And no, the dogs aren't always given "a free pass". Lot's of dogs are inherently dangerous. In fact all dogs are to a varying degree.
Pit Bulls are more dangerous than a Maltese and so on.
Gun Goobs who insist that people who kill with guns "could do the same thing with a knife or a something else" are the equivalent of Dog Doofuses saying (when a Pit Bull attacks someone) "well a maltese could do the same thing."
The fact that you CAN pick up a firearm and kill yourself and a bunch of people with it answers your question. You can't do that with say a marshmallow.
And no, the dogs aren't always given "a free pass". Lot's of dogs are inherently dangerous. In fact all dogs are to a varying degree.
Pit Bulls are more dangerous than a Maltese and so on.
Gun Goobs who insist that people who kill with guns "could do the same thing with a knife or a something else" are the equivalent of Dog Doofuses saying (when a Pit Bull attacks someone) "well a maltese could do the same thing."
no dogs are NOT inherently dangerous. dogs are born followers, and prefer to be balanced and calm submissive. when any dog is vicious, it is because the human behind the dog allowed the dog to get that way by not being the dogs pack leader and setting the rules and boundaries the dog has to live by.
The fact that you CAN pick up a firearm and kill yourself and a bunch of people with it answers your question. You can't do that with say a marshmallow.
And no, the dogs aren't always given "a free pass". Lot's of dogs are inherently dangerous. In fact all dogs are to a varying degree.
Pit Bulls are more dangerous than a Maltese and so on.
Gun Goobs who insist that people who kill with guns "could do the same thing with a knife or a something else" are the equivalent of Dog Doofuses saying (when a Pit Bull attacks someone) "well a maltese could do the same thing."
So you cannot kill someone with a knife?
Why, when the anti gunner such as you loose and argument, you start to call people names?
Do you agree with the treat title, now that everything has come out about this guy?
What about the picture the OP just posted...are there 2 AR15 in that pic?
no dogs are NOT inherently dangerous. dogs are born followers, and prefer to be balanced and calm submissive. when any dog is vicious, it is because the human behind the dog allowed the dog to get that way by not being the dogs pack leader and setting the rules and boundaries the dog has to live by.
Great I get to argue dogs with a gun supporter.
Dogs are wolves who have been bred to have certain traits. Wolves are certainly dangerous.
But that is besides the point. We have irresponsible gun owners and we have irresponsible dog owners.
I just can't deal with the intellectual dishonesty of the "inanimate object" argument that so many gun supporters use.
And to return to dogs, you are less likely to get mauled by a maltese than you are a Pit Bull.
Just like you are less likely to get killed with a butter knife than you are an automatic weapon.
Why, when the anti gunner such as you loose and argument, you start to call people names?
Do you agree with the treat title, now that everything has come out about this guy?
What about the picture the OP just posted...are there 2 AR15 in that pic?
So the names hurt your feelings. Sorry,
Here is exactly why I use the term "gun goob". Lack of intellectual acumen when it comes to guns. Complete inability to reason or use logic when it comes to guns.
Let's try a little exercise and I will be courteous.
Gun Supporter: "You can kill people with a knife just as easily as with a gun. Dead is dead."
You hear that one a lot.
However you also hear this one from gun supporters as well.
Gun supporter: "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight."
The first statement tries to derive an equivalency between a gun and a knife.
The second statement is implicit in maintaining that a gun is more advantageous than a knife in an armed conflict.
This is illogical.
And within the context of my post. It is no different than denying that a Pit Bull or Rotweiller is more dangerous than a Maltese or a Toy Poodle.
To get back on point. I believe that with mentally deranged people like this guy, the choice of weapon is less likely to matter. They may just as easily use a knife or a bat or something besides a gun. But for your standard jackass hothead who is armed with a gun? He is more likely to pull out the gun and squeeze off a few rounds in a state of rage than he is to use his fists or pick up a rock or something.
Here is exactly why I use the term "gun goob". Lack of intellectual acumen when it comes to guns. Complete inability to reason or use logic when it comes to guns.
Nope, does not hurt my feeling, one bit....
Most people who own guns, do not want to make a snap judgement as you say (acumen), they like to look at the entire problem, then make a decision. Unlike the OP who completely lied about the thread title....
Anyway...
Just shows that you are not willing to have a real conversation...because you cannot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
Let's try a little exercise and I will be courteous.
Gun Supporter: "You can kill people with a knife just as easily as with a gun. Dead is dead."
You hear that one a lot.
You don't have to be courteous, you have proven that those words mean nothing to you anyway...they are make you feel better words...which you have proven...
Dead is dead, is it not? With a gun or knife. When one wants to kill, they are going to kill...do you disagree?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
However you also hear this one from gun supporters as well.
Gun supporter: "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight."
Nope, that would be obama who said that....
Quote:
He [Obama] warned that the general election campaign could get ugly. “They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy,’ ” he said. A donor yelled out a deep accented “Don’t give in!” “I won’t but that sounded pretty scary. You’re a tough guy,” Obama said.
“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
The first statement tries to derive an equivalency between a gun and a knife.
The second statement is implicit in maintaining that a gun is more advantageous than a knife in an armed conflict.
So dead is not dead...that is what you are saying?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
This is illogical.
You have provided nothing but your opinion, nothing logical...
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
And within the context of my post. It is no different than denying that a Pit Bull or Rotweiller is more dangerous than a Maltese or a Toy Poodle.
I did not know guns had a brain, dogs do, they make their own decisions....
If you can provide where a gun has made a decision, you'll be worth millions...
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
To get back on point. I believe that with mentally deranged people like this guy, the choice of weapon is less likely to matter. They may just as easily use a knife or a bat or something besides a gun. But for your standard jackass hothead who is armed with a gun? He is more likely to pull out the gun and squeeze off a few rounds in a state of rage than he is to use his fists or pick up a rock or something.
Yes, I'll agree....however, they are going to kill...they are going to kill, right? Dead IS dead, whether you like it or not....by gun or knife.....
Now, I also noticed that you did not answer my other questions? Why is that, do you really have that little knowledge of guns to honestly answer those questions?
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.
