You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Today's shooting in America thread
- Thread starter Mad Eyed Screamer
- Start date
Bigga
Well-Known Member
Don Karleone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 22,719
- Team supported
- Vampire Squid FC
Well said Jon
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
Well said Jon
Wow just fucking wow...... brilliant watch
Grassland Blue
Well-Known Member
I don't know if this is the case at all NRA events, but at the one in Houston at the end of May last year, in the interests of security, the following items were banned;
Firearms
Firearm accessories
Knives
Backpacks
Selfie sticks.
Magnetometers were employed to enforce these regulations.
What do I derive from this?
For everyone to be safe people are actively discouraged from taking all the above into the event. (Surely for everyone to be safe, everyone should carry at least one firearm?!)
If, in the remote chance, the venue is attacked by native Red Indians , terrorist group, random nutcase etc. Where is the 'well regulated militia' to protect them?
The irony in the above is that for everyone to be safe, peoples freedoms are taken away by authority.
Another question?
Why have the anti NRA people not got their heads together and formed a group to attack these events, as the attendees would have no means of protecting themselves?
This is all very perplexing to me.
Is it safer for everyone to have guns, or no-one to have them?
When such (potential) weapons are banned from NRA events by the NRA themselves, what do readers think is the correct position to adopt?
Meanwhile I'm off to change my identity in case some NRA tool gets wind of my comments and decides to come and kill me because my questions are too big for his/her tiny mind to absorb and respond to.
Sayonara...
Firearms
Firearm accessories
Knives
Backpacks
Selfie sticks.
Magnetometers were employed to enforce these regulations.
What do I derive from this?
For everyone to be safe people are actively discouraged from taking all the above into the event. (Surely for everyone to be safe, everyone should carry at least one firearm?!)
If, in the remote chance, the venue is attacked by native Red Indians , terrorist group, random nutcase etc. Where is the 'well regulated militia' to protect them?
The irony in the above is that for everyone to be safe, peoples freedoms are taken away by authority.
Another question?
Why have the anti NRA people not got their heads together and formed a group to attack these events, as the attendees would have no means of protecting themselves?
This is all very perplexing to me.
Is it safer for everyone to have guns, or no-one to have them?
When such (potential) weapons are banned from NRA events by the NRA themselves, what do readers think is the correct position to adopt?
Meanwhile I'm off to change my identity in case some NRA tool gets wind of my comments and decides to come and kill me because my questions are too big for his/her tiny mind to absorb and respond to.
Sayonara...
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
RIP Grasslands Blue.I don't know if this is the case at all NRA events, but at the one in Houston at the end of May last year, in the interests of security, the following items were banned;
Firearms
Firearm accessories
Knives
Backpacks
Selfie sticks.
Magnetometers were employed to enforce these regulations.
What do I derive from this?
For everyone to be safe people are actively discouraged from taking all the above into the event. (Surely for everyone to be safe, everyone should carry at least one firearm?!)
If, in the remote chance, the venue is attacked by native Red Indians , terrorist group, random nutcase etc. Where is the 'well regulated militia' to protect them?
The irony in the above is that for everyone to be safe, peoples freedoms are taken away by authority.
Another question?
Why have the anti NRA people not got their heads together and formed a group to attack these events, as the attendees would have no means of protecting themselves?
This is all very perplexing to me.
Is it safer for everyone to have guns, or no-one to have them?
When such (potential) weapons are banned from NRA events by the NRA themselves, what do readers think is the correct position to adopt?
Meanwhile I'm off to change my identity in case some NRA tool gets wind of my comments and decides to come and kill me because my questions are too big for his/her tiny mind to absorb and respond to.
Sayonara...
Grassland Blue
Well-Known Member
Many thanks.RIP Grasslands Blue.
It's been nice....
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
The argument against everyone handing their guns in, is the good guys would do it but the bad guys wouldn't.I don't know if this is the case at all NRA events, but at the one in Houston at the end of May last year, in the interests of security, the following items were banned;
Firearms
Firearm accessories
Knives
Backpacks
Selfie sticks.
Magnetometers were employed to enforce these regulations.
What do I derive from this?
For everyone to be safe people are actively discouraged from taking all the above into the event. (Surely for everyone to be safe, everyone should carry at least one firearm?!)
If, in the remote chance, the venue is attacked by native Red Indians , terrorist group, random nutcase etc. Where is the 'well regulated militia' to protect them?
The irony in the above is that for everyone to be safe, peoples freedoms are taken away by authority.
Another question?
Why have the anti NRA people not got their heads together and formed a group to attack these events, as the attendees would have no means of protecting themselves?
This is all very perplexing to me.
Is it safer for everyone to have guns, or no-one to have them?
When such (potential) weapons are banned from NRA events by the NRA themselves, what do readers think is the correct position to adopt?
Meanwhile I'm off to change my identity in case some NRA tool gets wind of my comments and decides to come and kill me because my questions are too big for his/her tiny mind to absorb and respond to.
Sayonara...
Therefore yes it is safer for everyone to have one. It's like nuclear weapons. No one has yet pressed the red button because they known they'll get 3 fired back at them. Having them deters their use.
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
It's working well in the states so.The argument against everyone handing their guns in, is the good guys would do it but the bad guys wouldn't.
Therefore yes it is safer for everyone to have one. It's like nuclear weapons. No one has yet pressed the red button because they known they'll get 3 fired back at them. Having them deters their use.