I question their fitness as parents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I assume that most writers on this site are mommies or daddies.

Jeff will probably weigh in on this shortly, but this forum was invaded by a number of pro-gun freakazoids shortly after Sandy Hook. I think some of them are still hanging around and might not be "mommies or daddies."

I'm a pro-gun 'freakazoid' and have three kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And those who say they need guns, any guns, for personal protection against intruders? I question them as well. Because anyone I know with guns (and I only know a few) has them all locked up in their home, especially with young children around. So, the armed boogie man who breaks into their home in the middle of the night would have the jump on them. By the time they woke up, got the combination lock box off the high shelf, opened, retrieved gun and loaded...they could have called 911 and had the cops arrive.

Damned irresponsible parents allowed this kid to have access to a loaded weapon and looked what happened (filed under liberals are idiots)

http://www.federaljack.com/?p=178564

14-year-old Phoenix boy shoots armed intruder while babysitting siblings
December 19, 2012 by POPEYE

According to reports, the knocking turned into banging, and the boy rushed his siblings upstairs and grabbed his father’s handgun.
While at the top of the stairs, he saw an armed man break into the house through the front door.
Without hesitating, he fired at the intruder, wounding him. According to authorities, the intruder never fired a shot.

[ Edited to comply with copyright laws. ]

Something is weird about that story.

When I googled it to see if there was an update in Jan 2013 I found that some places say it happened in June 2012, others say Dec. 2012. What's that about?

[Anonymous]

Here's a much different version of the story. Notice that the boy called his father before calling 911. And that the intruder saw the boy and retreated down the stairs! The boy then show him while he was at the bottom of the stairs!

Then the boy's dad came home -- at this point the biy STILL had't called 911? ANd then then boys father shot the man!

I have no sympathy for the intruder. You break into someone's house, you get what you get. BUT... to say that the gun was the only thing that saved these kids? Preposterous.

http://www.azcentral.com/community/swvalley/articles/2012/06/29/20120629laveen-boy-shot-intruder-once-father-shot-him-twice-abrk.html

The boy stepped out of the line of fire, and the intruder ran downstairs, according to the documents. When he reached the bottom, he turned to see the boy standing at the top. The boy fired a single shot at the intruder, who collapsed, dropping his handgun nearby, according to the documents.

The boy kept his handgun pointed at the intruder as he continued to call his parents, according to the documents.

When the boy's parents arrived home, the father took the gun from him, the documents said.

The boy told his father that the intruder was reaching to grab the gun. The father turned toward the intruder and shot him twice, according to the documents.

He then helped his children get to a neighbor's home before calling police, according to the documents.



Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/swvalley/articles/2012/06/29/20120629laveen-boy-shot-intruder-once-father-shot-him-twice-abrk.html#ixzz2INwwIrUZ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I assume that most writers on this site are mommies or daddies.

Jeff will probably weigh in on this shortly, but this forum was invaded by a number of pro-gun freakazoids shortly after Sandy Hook. I think some of them are still hanging around and might not be "mommies or daddies."

I'm a pro-gun 'freakazoid' and have three kids.

If you're proud of that I'm sad for you. I'm the PP who authored the freakazoid comment, and I own a gun and have two kids myself. You miss my point.

OP is assuming that the only people commenting on this site are parents, and she is missing a big piece of the political forum who came crashing on here after this site was linked by the AR-15 forums shortly after The Sandy Hook massacre. I am not one of them, I am a lifelong resident of the DC area who has been on these boards since their inception. But my point was that there are posters here whose entire reason for being here is to rail against gun control, not because they are "mommies and daddies." They may be, but that is not why they are here.

Please store your guns safely, and good night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because you are short sighted and not that bright. That is why you don't understand the bigger issue. Now go watch some reality TV and drink your wine.

I fully understand the bigger issue. Think Chicago if you like stats...

What I don't understand is why you would use speculation to make your point and then claim that I'm the one that doesn't understand the bigger issue. Y'all claim that 'guns are only used for killing'. They are also used for self-defense. When that point is brought up, conservatives are called paranoid. But we are not the ones wanting guns banned or strictly controlled because we feel every school is going to be shot up. You like stats? Chance of being involved in a school shooting is 1 in 3 million.

Never let a crisis go to waste.

What are the odds that one of your grandchildren will be aborted? That is a serious question. Please do the math since you like stats.

[Anonymous]

LOL - you are questioning a kid calling his father and are questioning whether or not he needed to shoot because the guy was retreating down the stairs? Do you know what this guy had in mind AFTER HE BROKE INTO THE HOUSE? No. Neither did the kid. The intruder was ARMED to boot.

It happened in June. If you click on the Fox link the blogger put in the post, you will see it links to a June article. The blogger(s) reposted it in December in light of the BS that's been thrown around since Sandy Hook.

Holy f*ck you guys are NUTS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because you are short sighted and not that bright. That is why you don't understand the bigger issue. Now go watch some reality TV and drink your wine.

I fully understand the bigger issue. Think Chicago if you like stats...

What I don't understand is why you would use speculation to make your point and then claim that I'm the one that doesn't understand the bigger issue. Y'all claim that 'guns are only used for killing'. They are also used for self-defense. When that point is brought up, conservatives are called paranoid. But we are not the ones wanting guns banned or strictly controlled because we feel every school is going to be shot up. You like stats? Chance of being involved in a school shooting is 1 in 3 million.

Never let a crisis go to waste.

What are the odds that one of your grandchildren will be aborted? That is a serious question. Please do the math since you like stats.

Higher than the odds of one of my kids being shot at school - or one of my grandkids - if you look at how many abortions are performed yearly in the US compared to how many kids are shot dead at school yearly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I assume that most writers on this site are mommies or daddies.

Jeff will probably weigh in on this shortly, but this forum was invaded by a number of pro-gun freakazoids shortly after Sandy Hook. I think some of them are still hanging around and might not be "mommies or daddies."

I'm a pro-gun 'freakazoid' and have three kids.

If you're proud of that I'm sad for you. I'm the PP who authored the freakazoid comment, and I own a gun and have two kids myself. You miss my point.

OP is assuming that the only people commenting on this site are parents, and she is missing a big piece of the political forum who came crashing on here after this site was linked by the AR-15 forums shortly after The Sandy Hook massacre. I am not one of them, I am a lifelong resident of the DC area who has been on these boards since their inception. But my point was that there are posters here whose entire reason for being here is to rail against gun control, not because they are "mommies and daddies." They may be, but that is not why they are here.

Please store your guns safely, and good night.

I'm making fun of the 'freakazoid' comment. What is a pro-gun 'freakazoid'? People are PISSED OFF at the lunacy going on - NRA is responsible? Really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I assume that most writers on this site are mommies or daddies.

Jeff will probably weigh in on this shortly, but this forum was invaded by a number of pro-gun freakazoids shortly after Sandy Hook. I think some of them are still hanging around and might not be "mommies or daddies."

I'm a pro-gun 'freakazoid' and have three kids.

And did you use the c-word and p-word to refer to posters who did not agree with you? I assume PP is using freakazoid to describe that cohort not DCUMers who are pro-gun and civil posters.

[Anonymous]

21:54: Fox also runs reports that the president was not born in the US and not infrequently IDs any Republican caught in a scandal with a (D) after name in the ticker tape. There are valid reasons why folks doubt anything with Fox as a source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I assume that most writers on this site are mommies or daddies.

Jeff will probably weigh in on this shortly, but this forum was invaded by a number of pro-gun freakazoids shortly after Sandy Hook. I think some of them are still hanging around and might not be "mommies or daddies."

I'm a pro-gun 'freakazoid' and have three kids.

And did you use the c-word and p-word to refer to posters who did not agree with you? I assume PP is using freakazoid to describe that cohort not DCUMers who are pro-gun and civil posters.

Nope. How is that different than the abuse the libs here hand out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And those who say they need guns, any guns, for personal protection against intruders? I question them as well. Because anyone I know with guns (and I only know a few) has them all locked up in their home, especially with young children around. So, the armed boogie man who breaks into their home in the middle of the night would have the jump on them. By the time they woke up, got the combination lock box off the high shelf, opened, retrieved gun and loaded...they could have called 911 and had the cops arrive.

You don't sound like someone who's ever been robbed. We've never owned a gun and doubt we'll purchase one, but after a family member was recently burglarized, I can see why many people feel the need for that protection. There can be quite a gap of time between that 911 call and the arrival of help. Since burglars are often "young men" who aren't kind, thoughtful, and easily persuaded to leave peacefully, it's scary to think about how best to make sure your family is safe when they enter your home.

HA!

I knew a guy who was burglarized while he was asleep and they stole HIS gun!

[Anonymous]

PP: Gun-owning longtime DCUM user here. Please describe the "lunacy" to which you refer. Which was the executive order you disagree with the most? Perhaps the one that says we should actually have a director of the ATF? So he or she can properly oversee the investigation, arrest and prosecution of "pro-gun freakazoids" like this guy?

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2013/01/011613-col-criminal-charges-filed-against-toledo-man-found-with-18-firearms-body-armor-more-than-40000-rounds-of-ammunition.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:21:54: Fox also runs reports that the president was not born in the US and not infrequently IDs any Republican caught in a scandal with a (D) after name in the ticker tape. There are valid reasons why folks doubt anything with Fox as a source.

Links?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP: Gun-owning longtime DCUM user here. Please describe the "lunacy" to which you refer. Which was the executive order you disagree with the most? Perhaps the one that says we should actually have a director of the ATF? So he or she can properly oversee the investigation, arrest and prosecution of "pro-gun freakazoids" like this guy?

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2013/01/011613-col-criminal-charges-filed-against-toledo-man-found-with-18-firearms-body-armor-more-than-40000-rounds-of-ammunition.html

despite a previous conviction for the crime of manslaughter

This is a local issue, perhaps a state as well. How will the Feds help this? How can they react any faster than the locals? And isn't there an FBI if warranted?

How's it going with those Sandy victims? How long after the storm? Still suffering?

Feds are notorious for not moving that fast...