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.
All it takes is watching a few episodes of The First 48 to see how murderers tend to get less than 25 years. I just saw a case the other night where the guy got 15 years for shooting a man to death in a drug deal. He will probably serve 8, and he had an extensive criminal record.
It's almost like I'm hearing, "We need to ban guns, because it's too easy for murdering scumbags to get them when they are released from prison."
All it takes is watching a few episodes of The First 48 to see how murderers tend to get less than 25 years. I just saw a case the other night where the guy got 15 years forshooting a man to death in a drug deal. He will probably serve 8, and he had an extensive criminal record.
It's almost like I'm hearing, "We need to ban guns, because it's too easy for murdering scumbags to get them when they are released from prison."
I've seen this dozens maybe hundreds of times through the years. Some guy gets a fairly stiff sentence for committing a brutal violent crime and ends up serving less than a third of it.
In the only murder we have had here in the last seven years, the shooter shot a man in a motel room over a drug deal, the "victim" ran into the parking lot, was followed and shot another 5 times. The killer was charged with voluntary manslaughter. No one can figure out why it wasn't a murder charge. He will probably get 7 years and be out in three. He already had a long record and was out on probation. And they didn't charge the shooter with a felon in possession of a handgun.
Our judges and others in the criminal justice system refuse to do their jobs. They release vicious, violent animals back on to the public time after time with minimal sentences. Honestly...I'm starting to think it's going to take some old fashioned "vigilante justice" to ever straighten out our violent crime problems. And some on the receiving end...need to be these judges that are responsible for this madness.
With regard to the OP, I'm sure CNN and BSNBC will cover this. This is a major story and they are responsible news organizations. They wouldn't lie to their viewers or suppress news stories just to push their agenda now, would they? I mean, they reported accurately on the 5 year old special needs girl here in Idaho that was sexually assaulted and urinated on by Muslim migrants now, didn't they?
Our judges and others in the criminal justice system refuse to do their jobs. They release vicious, violent animals back on to the public time after time with minimal sentences. Honestly...I'm starting to think it's going to take some old fashioned "vigilante justice" to ever straighten out our violent crime problems. And some on the receiving end...need to be these judges that are responsible for this madness.
With regard to the OP, I'm sure CNN and BSNBC will cover this. This is a major story and they are responsible news organizations. They wouldn't lie to their viewers or suppress news stories just to push their agenda now, would they? I mean, they reported accurately on the 5 year old special needs girl here in Idaho that was sexually assaulted and urinated on by Muslim migrants now, didn't they?
What the article actually says is that they were arguing with each other and one guy missed, the other didnt.
This is the very definition of why you shouldnt have guns in a night clube(even though this happened outside of it).
This does nothing to help the "good guy with a gun" argument.
It certainly does help the good guy with a gun argument. Here is a link to another article about this story and the perp did not have a concealed license and had priors. So yea, the attacker was not a good guy prior to the shooting.
Not only was he charged with attempted murder, he is also charged with illegal carrying of a weapon.
The argument was not with the man that was legally concealed carrying.
This is a perfect example of a good guy with a gun stopping someone from shooting even more people and potentially killing many.
What the article actually says is that they were arguing with each other and one guy missed, the other didnt.
This is the very definition of why you shouldnt have guns in a night clube(even though this happened outside of it).
This does nothing to help the "good guy with a gun" argument.
How was not a good guy with a gun?
Arguing is not a crime, neither is going to a club.
Shooting at someone without justification is a crime but shooting back in self-defense is not.
Is that not clear to you or are you being disingenuous?
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.
