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.
There really is way too much BS. I am a native Bostonian. My father owned two guns when I was younger. I still have plenty of family and friends there, including both parents. Those who are spreading lies like this and saying that residents were told, at gun point, to go back in their houses should be ashamed of themselves. What is it with the right believing that if the repeat things enough, people will believe it?
It wasn't a lie, it was a question and it does seem one can get jail time if they carry an unregistered gun.
"Might be true" is what you said and what I meant.
Fox News forms everything in a question so you will believe them, that is why they aren't actual news. If they were real news it would of taken an intern a couple minutes to search and find out that it was a false statement, therefore not worth reporting. But instead they report it and spin it and you bought into it. Now, you know better.
So, a person posts something that is factually wrong, and you point fingers at the entire right (140M)?
Are you serious?
Lunch is served
No not the entire right, but the Fox News, right wing talk radio and blog fanatics, yes. If the right doesn't want to associated with those who constantly spread lies, they should say something. I don't hear them though.
I was said during a conversation, not as hard news.
Maybe this should get a warning like the scanner warning we got here in Boston: Don't broadcast anything said on a cable news network until verified from other news sources because it's a public safety hazard.
It can be easily verified to see if it is true. I am just reporting on what Hannity said and getting opinions of a city who is without guns in a moment like this, true or not. Still something to ponder. No guns with terrorists running around?
1. As you can see, no civilian in Watertown was hurt that day. Whether or not they were armed. If you want to make a pro-gun point then you should probably choose an example were more liberal gun laws would have saved lives or changed anything about the situation.
2. If there are thousands of trained solidiers and police men searching for an armed man in civilian clothes in your town it wouldn't be a very good idea to stand in your front yard or even near any window with a gun in your hand. That would probably be way more dangerous/deadly than taking the incredibly slim chance of encountering the terrorist unarmed...
The whole idea of having a gun for shooting burglars, trespassers and terrorists seems pretty ridiculous to me anyways. And don't think I'm some marxist gun-hater. There is a fully automatic assault rifle in my closet 5 feet away from me right now. But it's there because I am part of a conscript-militia army, to shoot for fun and because I just like guns... But it's not intended to defend myself or my property. That's what the police is for...
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.
