On 1/24/2013 9:14 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
the same old useless nothing...

Varmint killer Tim S wrote
Some people die because of them, too. proven fact. That's why major
car manufacturers have a shut off for the airbags. It's law the car
must be equipped with the airbag, but it's use is optional to the
drivers discretion.

Bzzztttt, don't think so Tim. The button is there because sometimes
babies in seats or small children who can be in more danger during a
crash with the air bag can turn it off, not so a "regular" person who
will be protected can turn it off. In most states it's the law too..
Just sayin' I don't think it's "optional" anywhere I know of.

Well, then we should eliminate them!

On 1/24/13 9:32 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 1/24/2013 9:16 AM, iBoaterer wrote:


This from the idiot that wants to have a retired cop with a gun in a
school, so if a shooter comes in, he can provide "cover fire" in a
school full of kids!


Yup, I do... and you still can't come up with one good reason why that
would be worse than what we have now. All you have is your harryisms...LOL!

Because it gives a false sense of security and because the old retired
cop probably would get shot and if he got into a firefight, more
teachers and students might get shot. It's a stupid idea, which, of
course, is all you ever have, because, basically, you're an ignorant slut.

When is the coming out party?

In article ,
says...

On 1/24/2013 9:16 AM, iBoaterer wrote:


This from the idiot that wants to have a retired cop with a gun in a
school, so if a shooter comes in, he can provide "cover fire" in a
school full of kids!


Yup, I do... and you still can't come up with one good reason why that
would be worse than what we have now. All you have is your harryisms...LOL!

I can come up with several reasons, moron.

1. Cover fire would likely kill as many or more kids than a shooter.
2. Who says that the very person you hire to have a loaded weapon in the
school doesn't go off of his rocker and start a shooting rampage?
3. What if this person was overtaken by a person or persons, he'd just
be giving the perpetrator more fire power.
4. Teaching kids that violence is a good thing is never a good thing.

On 1/24/2013 9:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 1/24/2013 9:16 AM, iBoaterer wrote:


This from the idiot that wants to have a retired cop with a gun in a
school, so if a shooter comes in, he can provide "cover fire" in a
school full of kids!


Yup, I do... and you still can't come up with one good reason why that
would be worse than what we have now. All you have is your harryisms...LOL!

I can come up with several reasons, moron.

1. Cover fire would likely kill as many or more kids than a shooter.

Doubt it. Most of these shooters kill themselves as soon as they are
confronted by anybody with a weapon. A shot or two toward a brick wall
would probably finish most of them.

2. Who says that the very person you hire to have a loaded weapon in the
school doesn't go off of his rocker and start a shooting rampage?

Odds are better a retired cop has less chance after years of training
and scrutiny, than an average citizen.

3. What if this person was overtaken by a person or persons, he'd just
be giving the perpetrator more fire power.

These shooters generally come armed, why take a chance of trying to
"overtake" an armed police officer?

4. Teaching kids that violence is a good thing is never a good thing.


Teaching kids to defend themselves, is always a good thing...

In article ,
says...

On 1/24/2013 9:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 1/24/2013 9:16 AM, iBoaterer wrote:


This from the idiot that wants to have a retired cop with a gun in a
school, so if a shooter comes in, he can provide "cover fire" in a
school full of kids!


Yup, I do... and you still can't come up with one good reason why that
would be worse than what we have now. All you have is your harryisms...LOL!

I can come up with several reasons, moron.

1. Cover fire would likely kill as many or more kids than a shooter.

Doubt it. Most of these shooters kill themselves as soon as they are
confronted by anybody with a weapon. A shot or two toward a brick wall
would probably finish most of them.

Please give the data to back up your absurd statement.

2. Who says that the very person you hire to have a loaded weapon in the
school doesn't go off of his rocker and start a shooting rampage?

Odds are better a retired cop has less chance after years of training
and scrutiny, than an average citizen.

Please give the data to show these odds.

3. What if this person was overtaken by a person or persons, he'd just
be giving the perpetrator more fire power.

These shooters generally come armed, why take a chance of trying to
"overtake" an armed police officer?

Happens all of the time.

4. Teaching kids that violence is a good thing is never a good thing.


Teaching kids to defend themselves, is always a good thing...

Right, teach THEM how to be an aggressive asshole with a gun, maybe THEY
will grow up to massacre a school full of little kids.

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:43:03 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:12:30 -0800, jps wrote:


What a great way to celebrate gun day!!!

The New Mexico teenager accused of gunning down his family over the
weekend had reloaded his guns after the attacks and planned to go to a
Wal-Mart and randomly shoot people, authorities said Tuesday.

Instead, 15-year-old Nehemiah Griego texted a picture of his dead
mother to his 12-year-old girlfriend, then spent much of Saturday with
the girl, they said. The two went to the church where his father had
been a pastor, and Griego eventually admitted killing his parents and
three younger siblings.

Bernalillo County Sheriff Dan Houston said Griego had planned the
attack for a week, but it's unclear if he ever actually went to a
Wal-Mart or why he changed his mind. The teen said he had planned to
randomly shoot more people, then die in a shootout with law
enforcement, according to authorities.

Clearly indicates that laws, Jesus, family values, and about 10 other
bastions of "civilization" are just so much bull****.

....in the case of this severely imbalanced individual.


Is there anything in your thought processes that would lead you to
believe that this nut case wouldn't have concisely planned another
slaughter, in spite of any spate of laws promulgated by a flock of
do-gooders (at this time, Liberal Democrats)?

If so, what?

Yup, a shootout with the police.


Salmonbait

--

'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument!