On 1/23/2013 10:35 AM, Salmonbait wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:25:47 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote:

On Jan 22, 1:12 pm, jps wrote:

Waaahooooo!!!

You really like that, don't you?

You're absolutely correct.

Somewhat sickening that he high-fives murders because they 'support his position', whatever that is.



Life is not all that important to the new collective DNC... voter fraud
and who they can get to the polls is all they care about.

In article , says...

On 1/23/2013 10:35 AM, Salmonbait wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:25:47 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote:

On Jan 22, 1:12 pm, jps wrote:

Waaahooooo!!!

You really like that, don't you?

You're absolutely correct.

Somewhat sickening that he high-fives murders because they 'support his position', whatever that is.



Life is not all that important to the new collective DNC... voter fraud
and who they can get to the polls is all they care about.

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!

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!

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.