Gun question

rberq wrote:

jpete wrote:If you use a hand grenade to "defend" yourself, and you cause an innocent bystander to lose his life, liberty or pursuit, then you go to jail for the rest of your life.

How about if you use a handgun to defend yourself, and a shot goes astray and kills an innocent bystander? Jail for you?

If I indescriminately started firing into a crowd, yes. There's a difference between "gun ownership" and "responsible gun ownership".

Every member of the Latin Kings are "gun owners", I'd hardly call them "responsible"

In the example given, a hand grenade was used. I don't care if you have one, but it is an indescriminate weapon. As opposed to a handgun which can be employed like a surgeons scalpel to remove cancerous tissue and leave the good stuff alone.

If you have a hand grenade that by design ONLY kills its intended target and no one else, by all means, lob away.

jpete wrote:

rberq wrote:

jpete wrote:If you use a hand grenade to "defend" yourself, and you cause an innocent bystander to lose his life, liberty or pursuit, then you go to jail for the rest of your life.

How about if you use a handgun to defend yourself, and a shot goes astray and kills an innocent bystander? Jail for you?

If I indescriminately started firing into a crowd, yes. There's a difference between "gun ownership" and "responsible gun ownership".

Hi Jpete,

Obviously, rberq has never taken a Basic Markmanship class outside of maybe the military. If he had he would know that the police will give you the first shot, and maybe the second as self-defense but you'd better be able to explain the rest. Training and practice are imperative in order to be a responsible gun owner. Lisa

Soooo,does this mean that emptying a nine mill. clip into somebody comin at you with a knife,could be misconstrued as excessive Damn

a judge might think so,


but i dont

outstanding

tvb wrote:Sorry, you;re right, I should have included citations:

NYTimes/CBS News poll conducted 4/5/12. http://documents.nytimes.com/new-york-t ... cument/p41 35% claim an income below $50K

Gallup poll from March 26 - 28 has 45% claiming an income below $50K. http://www.gallup.com/poll/127181/Tea-P ... ics.aspx#1

And here is the source of the 47% pay no taxes meme that talk radio has used to inflamed those who can't be bothered to do their own research. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/`

Boy, it sure does seem like those tea partiers are on an positive income roller coaster. At the end of March 45% of them made less then 50K but that number had declined to 35% in April. I wonder how you move up on the pay scale that quickly. How can you continue to say that "Large numbers" of tea partiers don't make enough to have to pay taxes? Your sources can't seem to even come up with data that's anywhere close to each other and you certainly can't say that they were the majority at any one tea party. Anyway, like I said in response to another posting; it doesn't matter, they are still out there protesting the Obama administration's policies. I assume they filed taxes and are operating within the law. It just so happens that the law favors them this time around.

We all know you're going to call them hypocrites, without knowing their personal stories, but since we all know that, don't waste your time actually doing it. Lisa

freetown fred wrote:Soooo,does this mean that emptying a nine mill. clip into somebody comin at you with a knife,could be misconstrued as excessive Damn

If you keep shootin' and he keeps comin ', I'd say we've got a "good shoot".

tvb wrote:Dare I say that I suggest your next sign at a strap on party

Dann757 wrote:Your tasteless statement above clearly reveals your character. Very sad.

tvb wrote:You've got a dirty mind. Every picture I've seen has people with their guns strapped to their hips, sides or back. Don't disparage me just because your mind is in the gutter.

Poconoeagle wrote: he nor most of us do not. you in your usual snarky and very sleezy way with words, purposefully

used the "strap on" wording to another women as a low life way of trying to insult her. imo

all of us REAL americans can and always see thru you as its a blatant stab in your usual passive agressive manner.....

Gee, color me innocent - the implication of a couple of posting is that I should be insulted. Heck, I thought TVB was just showing her ignorance again. Go figure, I guess it's true you can't be insulted unless you want to be and sad as it is to say I don't think TVB could say anything that I would consider worthy to be insulted over. Life's too short. Lisa

Good for you Lisa,
Once again you prove that you have class, dignity, true grit, and heroic Patriotism.

lowfog01 wrote:Boy, it sure does seem like those tea partiers are on an positive income roller coaster

The low-income tea partiers are complaining about taxes they don't pay, and the high-income ones are complaining about a system that has been good to them. Aren't any of them in the middle and "just right"?

In fairness, I know many are just fed up with government in general, which is reasonable. The tax-protest message seems to be drowning out the generally-dissatisfied message, which makes it appear that the richer folks are commandeering the movement for their own benefit. And the far-right talk-radio mouths are trying to commandeer it as an attack on the Obama administration -- I'd like to think that, had the movement started a few years ago, the Bush administration would have come in for a few knocks as well. The Democrats? They can't get organized enough to commandeer a tuna sandwich for lunch. And the Republicans? The GOP would like to commandeer the movement, but they're kind of walking on eggshells, afraid to draw too much notice to themselves lest the partiers point out the brown stain on their hands may not be tea after all.

I went to my first rally in 2007. Your friends in the MSM ignored and/or ridiculed it.

rberq wrote:The tax-protest message seems to be drowning out the generally-dissatisfied message, which makes it appear that the richer folks are commandeering the movement for their own benefit.

Is that a conclusion or simply the place where you got tired of thinking?

rberq wrote:lest the partiers point out the brown stain on their hands may not be tea after all.

Is that thoughtful or intelligent?

rberq wrote: I'd like to think that, had the movement started a few years ago, the Bush administration would have come in for a few knocks as well.

It didnt start a few years ago because we didnt have a million new taxes implemented on us, nor did we have a socialist govt at the time.

brckwlt wrote:

rberq wrote: I'd like to think that, had the movement started a few years ago, the Bush administration would have come in for a few knocks as well.

It didnt start a few years ago because we didnt have a million new taxes implemented on us, nor did we have a socialist govt at the time.

It DID start a few years ago. I have a feeling the words "blame America first" have derisively crossed your lips. Some people saw that spending by BushCo was going to hit us hard. Some people saw that the PATRIOT Act is a terrible threat to all of us.

I was at a rally in Boston in '07, and in D.C. in '08.

Unfortunately, it's a bit like that tree falling in the woods that no one is around to hear. If several thousand people gather and the MSM isn't there to cover it, did it happen?

No the tea party movement DID NOT start a few years ago you are wrong.