On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:25:08 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

If the goal is to make the killing of 20 kids take 10 seconds longer, then it's a stupid goal! Do
you get the point?

On 12/20/2012 2:54 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:25:08 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

If the goal is to make the killing of 20 kids take 10 seconds longer, then it's a stupid goal! Do
you get the point?



Why do you gotta' be such a ****ing asshole all the time. Yes, when it
comes to somebody shooting and me running, I will take the extra ten
****ing seconds, even if it only saves one life. Remember, this moron
stopped shooting kids and shot himself when he heard the cops coming...
If they had come 10 seconds earlier, unless you can tell me no lives
could in any way be saved, you are just being a self serving ****...

In article , says...

On 12/20/2012 2:54 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:25:08 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

If the goal is to make the killing of 20 kids take 10 seconds longer, then it's a stupid goal! Do
you get the point?



Why do you gotta' be such a ****ing asshole all the time. Yes, when it
comes to somebody shooting and me running, I will take the extra ten
****ing seconds, even if it only saves one life. Remember, this moron
stopped shooting kids and shot himself when he heard the cops coming...
If they had come 10 seconds earlier, unless you can tell me no lives
could in any way be saved, you are just being a self serving ****...

Man, just like Harry, you sure go off when someone shows you what a
moron you are!

On 12/20/2012 11:54 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:25:08 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

If the goal is to make the killing of 20 kids take 10 seconds longer, then it's a stupid goal! Do
you get the point?


Look who's being stupid... the goal is to make the potential killing of
20 kids result in less than 20 dead kids. The fewer the better. I
don't buy your assertions.

On 12/21/2012 12:40 AM, thumper wrote:
On 12/20/2012 11:54 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:25:08 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with
high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to
kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In
fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a
school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

If the goal is to make the killing of 20 kids take 10 seconds longer,
then it's a stupid goal! Do
you get the point?


Look who's being stupid... the goal is to make the potential killing of
20 kids result in less than 20 dead kids. The fewer the better. I
don't buy your assertions.


I don't either... I was talking to a friend tonight and he was showing
me his SKS... I asked him what ten seconds meant in the context of a
mass shooter, and he actually took the time to "do the math" and agreed
with me... "I'll take it"...

On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:40:27 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/20/2012 11:54 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:25:08 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

If the goal is to make the killing of 20 kids take 10 seconds longer, then it's a stupid goal! Do
you get the point?


Look who's being stupid... the goal is to make the potential killing of
20 kids result in less than 20 dead kids. The fewer the better. I
don't buy your assertions.

I'd much rather find a solution that would prevent the killing of all twenty, not just allow the
killing of 19.

I guess that's a hard one.

On 12/21/2012 6:38 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:40:27 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/20/2012 11:54 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:25:08 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/19/2012 12:49 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:33:35 -0800, thumper wrote:

On 12/18/2012 12:21 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:

Fine - do away with 'military style...combat assault rifles with high capacity (not defined)
magazines'. How the hell would that stop someone who wanted to kill twenty kids? It might make him a
little slower, but not much!

Yeah, lets make it as easy as possible.

That was kind of a stupid reply. C-4 would make it *very* easy. In fact, I'm wondering why some
jihadist hasn't strapped a bomb to her chest and walked into a school cafeteria during lunchtime.

Yeah, it wasn't the time for sarcasm. You got my point though.

If the goal is to make the killing of 20 kids take 10 seconds longer, then it's a stupid goal! Do
you get the point?


Look who's being stupid... the goal is to make the potential killing of
20 kids result in less than 20 dead kids. The fewer the better. I
don't buy your assertions.

I'd much rather find a solution that would prevent the killing of all twenty, not just allow the
killing of 19.

I guess that's a hard one.


It is. I don't think it's effective to hold out for perfection. It
seems like an excuse to do nothing. I'll take improvement.