Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

One of those people who had a gun on hand to defend his hearth, home and family, one would suppose!

Viva gun ownership! Nothing could be more American and patriotic.

And sometimes deadly.

Alcohol involved? Odds are it was. Most of these domestic violence incidents are fueled by John Barleycorn.

So let's keep making it easy for folks to get guns and booze. What real American could argue with that?
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
One of those people who had a gun on hand to defend his hearth, home and family, one would suppose!

Viva gun ownership! Nothing could be more American and patriotic.

And sometimes deadly.

Alcohol involved? Odds are it was. Most of these domestic violence incidents are fueled by John Barleycorn.

So let's keep making it easy for folks to get guns and booze. What real American could argue with that?


Would it have made you feel better if he had stabbed her to death, or run over her with a car?

Would she be any less dead?
quote:
Originally posted by what tha:
People with knives kill people too. Guess we better take them away also.


...and then there is this thing called manual strangulation, involving securely wrapping both hands around a person's throat and applying force/compression until small bones begin to snap and blood vessels rupture in the eyes...blue coloration around the mouth is another indicator that you do not need a gun to take a life.

I have seen a Louisville Slugger used to end a life also...
quote:
Originally posted by what tha:
I agree Sassy, its not the gun that killed her it is the sicko who pulled the trigger. If he wouldn't have had a gun he would have done it with something else, like a knife, bat, car, etc.


Under the Lautenberg Act, this guy was NOT ALLOWED to have a firearm. Under this act, ANYone served with an Order of Protection MUST, by federal law, surrender all firearms that they own/have access to UNTIL the O/P is vacated.
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by what tha:
I agree Sassy, its not the gun that killed her it is the sicko who pulled the trigger. If he wouldn't have had a gun he would have done it with something else, like a knife, bat, car, etc.


Under the Lautenberg Act, this guy was NOT ALLOWED to have a firearm. Under this act, ANYone served with an Order of Protection MUST, by federal law, surrender all firearms that they own/have access to UNTIL the O/P is vacated.



in the article it says she was served not him, so the lautenburg act does not apply.
quote:
Originally posted by doobiebrother88:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by what tha:
I agree Sassy, its not the gun that killed her it is the sicko who pulled the trigger. If he wouldn't have had a gun he would have done it with something else, like a knife, bat, car, etc.



Under the Lautenberg Act, this guy was NOT ALLOWED to have a firearm. Under this act, ANYone served with an Order of Protection MUST, by federal law, surrender all firearms that they own/have access to UNTIL the O/P is vacated.



in the article it says she was served not him, so the lautenburg act does not apply.



The article also stated that HE had been previously served with an O/P (eventually dropped). It would be interesting to note IF AT THAT TIME he was relieved of any firearms in his possession.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×