 | | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) myself (...) If you aim a gun at me, (as my basic training would say), you'd better have a dammed good reason for wanting to kill me-or have you never had formal firearms training? If you aim at someone, then the ONLY possible reason is that (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) I believe I had some stray electrons move the knife and gun around, just like Larry P. has happen occasionally :) (it should have been easier to kill with a gun than a knife...that'd be better eh?) James (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Well, it could be argued you ARE using ineffectual ammo ;-) The most destructive is that which expands and STAYS in the body, tearing it to shreds. Oh wait, dum-dums are illegal. Nevermind, stick with your hollowpoints and massive exit wounds (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
So the only one that isn't a victim is the non-biological father forced to pay child support? That's the largest pile of bovine dung I've ever heard! (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
I meant he wouldn't be much of a victim to be forced to pay child support due to his previous action. I thought that was obvious. I KNOW *I* don't have any children in the world, and never will. (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
As always, snipped. (...) I go to the range enough that I don't often miss. But... the bullets I use go through the body and then through the wall anyway, even if I don't miss. I don't like to use something ineffectual. But others do miss. Accidents (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
Hugely snipped... (...) Precisely. And what the lord(1) giveth, the lord taketh away. That's my point. The US is (theoretically(2)) constrained in what rights it can usurp because the US is founded on the principle that rights come from the (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) So, tell me again, WHY in the heck do we have to get a liscense to purchase amunition? What's wrong with a drivers liscence or other proof-of-age certificate? Oh, how dumb of me, could it be that there IS a reason we have to shell out huge (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) I believe that you just severly contradicted your entire preceding argument. (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) How do those numbers compare in the UK? What if you add in all non-firearm (non vehicular) murders? (...) I'd bet so. (...) Maybe Brittons (is that right?) are less likely to kill one another. You can't suggest a causal relationship based on (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
