Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by edesignuk, Feb 13, 2009.
What a twunt.
So it's OK to bring my green-painted horse in then?
Cos there's no signs saying 'No green-painted horses called "Kermit" allowed'.
Valid point if guns are not allowed in any hospitals in the state. But if some hospitals allow guns but this one does not, how is he supposed to know that? I don't at all condone these idiots walking around with six-shooters in their pockets thinking they're still playing cowboys and indians from when they were kids, but logic dictates that if you don't allow something you need to let people know it.
i agree with you on that one. in addition if a state allows guns but the hospital doesn't what is he supposed to do? leave it at the bus station? best is not to have a gun with you anyway (unless there is a specific reason why you need it. something like shooting yourself doesn't count though)
What a dumbass.
Apply brain before leaving the house? Even in gun-legal areas, there are many specific places that don't allow guns - eg schools etc.
If he was paying for lunch, looks like he wasn't there as an emergency admission so he could have chosen to leave his gun behind. But now he is. Minus one bollock I expect.
The only thing I find funny about this is that people/Americans actually walk around with guns in their pockets. I knew some people collected guns, and had guns in the house (you never know when the city will be invaded...), but I didn't realize normal citizens walked around as though it were the "wild west."
Anyway, I don't feel bad at all that he got shot.
Does this mean he had one in the breach, and the hammer cocked??
If so, he's an idiot, and needs to be locked-up for his own good.
If not, he must have extra thumbs, because it isn't easy to do that.
Cocked and locked is okay but some guns use a safety built into the trigger. IMO, not safe for carrying loose in a pants pocket.
Which brings up another question; why the heck was he carrying a loose gun?!?! Dumbass. One of my holsters simply hangs on the inside of the beltline and is securely held in place.
He should be thankful he wasn't carrying a big bore such as a Wildey or Desert Eagle. He would have blown his leg completely off!
It will be the Wild West if the government disarms its law abiding citizens.
Criminals love unarmed victims.
I don't want to start a gun control/no gun control debate, because I don't support gun control. All the same, isn't it kind of asinine to suggest that "it will be the Wild West" when there are plenty of other nations with strict gun control and much lower crime rates? Or are you suggesting Americans are uniquely savage?
VAs actually do specifically and clearly advertise this fact. The reason they do it in large part is that this specific behavior -- carrying a gun in places where one knows one should not have a gun -- has been repeatedly associated with PTSD by the military, and there have been numerous problems over the years with discharged soldiers carrying guns around for no reason as sequelae of their PTSD....
Hospitals are NOT off limits to licensed concealed carry in Colorado. If there were no signs and the person had a permit, then he was not breaking the law by carrying concealed there. Discharging the weapon as he did, that's another matter.
A quick Google search will reveal that police officers accidentally discharge their weapons, too. In fact, in the 10 year period following the D.C. police department's adoption of the Glock 9mm, there were 120 accidental discharges by the D.C. police officers. I wonder how many of them were arrested?
Sorry, but no. In the US there are many guns owned by civilians and in areas where stricter gun control are in place there is usually a rise in shootings. Simply put, the criminals have the guns and the victims do not.
To put it in perspective, more US civilians are killed in Chicago than troops in the Iraq war. This does not include coalition troops. Sad but true.
Perhaps it is asinine to think otherwise.
seems like an appropriate thread to share this
(some mild language in the vid).
Our constitution says that any act not prohibited by law is allowed. Your comment suggests that you would prefer a government and system of laws that details what actions are allowed and anything not approved by the government is illegal? No thanks.
Until they stop manufacturing hand-guns, I will back-up this statement.
I wonder how many of them lost toes.
(My immediate image was of toes flying all over the place.)
yes, the reason criminals aren't out looting and stealing 24/7 is because of the power citizen's who are always defending people
Perhaps I misread your post, but I don't know how your post proves Iscariot to be incorrect in his statement. If anything, I think you backed him up.
He should have cut his hand off first. Then he wouldn't be able to shoot himself.
(Referring to the thread about the guy who cut his hand off.)
((Said thread also referring to this one.))
((((Oh no! a logic nazi will flame me for using recursion incorrectly!))))
(((((Is there any point to this?)))))
I assume you are speaking of the "savage" comment. Backing him up? No, you are incorrect.
We are all at the mercy of of our human nature and free will and guns make it much easier to control someone than without a gun. There is no place on this earth where the people are in total control of their physical and emotional environment. The only difference is the ability to have weapons or not.
I'm not saying it is right or wrong but rather making a statement.
It seems the right man got shot, in this case.
It's nice that no innocent victim got hit.
Maybe he was trying to shoot himself to get out of eating something disgusting.
Coming from a country where guns are banned, I don't see why I would want to have a gun. I went through a 2.5 years conscript army training, so I know a thing or two about firearms.
I can totally see that.
Because, of course, you never know when you're gonna be attacked by a homicidal cancer patient armed with a plastic spoon.