SHOOTING AT MEDINA GUN Show!

[FKA Reader]

-tip- wrote:

<quoted text>
First, my post is historically accurate.
Second, no law can prevent evil or accidents.
"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
[...sword never kills anybody; it's a tool in the killer's hand.]

Are you an anarchist?

And by the way--laws against drunk driving have been shown to be significant in the prevention of automobile accidents, as have been laws to raise the legal drinking age and to set limits on the hours and number of passenges for teenage drivers. Accidents have been rendered less fatal through laws requiring seatbelts and a good many other safety features.

[-tip-]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Because nobody is contemplating any changes to the equal protection clauses of the US Constition--which would be required to undertake such targetted attempts at disarmament.
In fact, nobody is even contemplating any changes to the Second Amendment.
The bulk of what has been proposed (except for bans on military assault rifles owned by private citizens) has to do with improved enforcement of existing laws regarding sales and ownership.

Only the uninformed believe what you just stated.

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T7DVEAICJ...

[Che Reagan Christ]

-tip- wrote:

<quoted text>
LaPierre?
The work referenced was authored by Stephen P. Halbrook, Ph.D. from Florida State University, J.D. from Georgetown University. Located in Fairfax, Virginia, he litigates constitutional law issues in the federal courts, including the Supreme Court.

Read it or don't. It's your choice to remain uninformed.

http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/67-ha...

[-tip-]

Che Reagan Christ wrote:

<quoted text>
Think about it. That isn't a gun issue. It is a persecution issue. Raise the Hitler argument when a law is introduced that treats Catholics in this country disproportionately in regard to gun ownership.

You are correct; it isn't a gun [control] issue.
It is a citizen control issue.

Reread:

"...Next, the Nazi seizure of power in 1933 was consolidated by massive searches and seizures of firearms from political opponents, who were invariably described as 'communists.'"

I will remind you that Barack Hussein Obama has yet to expound upon his Executive Order #4:

"4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks."

Exactly what are these "categories"?
Exactly what defines "dangerous"?

Hitler had his own ideas.

[-tip-]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Are you an anarchist?
And by the way--laws against drunk driving have been shown to be significant in the prevention of automobile accidents, as have been laws to raise the legal drinking age and to set limits on the hours and number of passenges for teenage drivers. Accidents have been rendered less fatal through laws requiring seatbelts and a good many other safety features.

The law does not prevent citizens from any action.
The law condemns those who do not keep it.

[-tip-]

Che Reagan Christ wrote:

<quoted text>
Read it or don't. It's your choice to remain uninformed.
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/67-ha...

Repeat:

Any purported legal scholar who makes the following statement regarding Hitler's gun control measures...:

"The law did prohibit Jews and other persecuted classes from owning guns, but this should not be an indictment of gun control in general."

...cannot be taken seriously.

[BUCK JOHNSON]

-tip- wrote:

<quoted text>
Repeat:
Any purported legal scholar who makes the following statement regarding Hitler's gun control measures...:
"The law did prohibit Jews and other persecuted classes from owning guns, but this should not be an indictment of gun control in general."
...cannot be taken seriously.

Why do you post so much, pathetic.

[-tip-]

BUCK JOHNSON wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do you post so much, pathetic.

Thanks for confirming a job well done.

[Che Reagan Christ]

-tip- wrote:

<quoted text>
Repeat:
Any purported legal scholar who makes the following statement regarding Hitler's gun control measures...:
"The law did prohibit Jews and other persecuted classes from owning guns, but this should not be an indictment of gun control in general."
...cannot be taken seriously.

Of course, you are qualified to judge legal scholarship. Where did you get your law degree?

[-tip-]

Che Reagan Christ wrote:

<quoted text>
Of course, you are qualified to judge legal scholarship. Where did you get your law degree?

The more pressing question would be where you got yours.
You deserve a refund.

[FKA Reader]

-tip- wrote:

<quoted text>
Only the uninformed believe what you just stated.
http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T7DVEAICJ...

Citing Topix as a source demostrates a real commitment to being uninformed.

[-tip-]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Citing Topix as a source demostrates a real commitment to being uninformed.

"Just say 'No!' to spoonfeeding leftists."

[Duke for Mayor]

-tip- wrote:

<quoted text>
From a poster who refuses to follow her logic to its natural conclusion?
I think not.

You're not very bright are you? Here, I'll let you try again. Here's your writing:

"And you all believe if you present factual evidence of rare gun-involved massacres it supports your personal conclusion that all gunowners are raving lunatics bent on mass murder."

There is an untruth in it that causes your conclusion to fail.

Figure it out.

woof

[Che Reagan Christ]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
You're not very bright are you? Here, I'll let you try again. Here's your writing:
"And you all believe if you present factual evidence of rare gun-involved massacres it supports your personal conclusion that all gunowners are raving lunatics bent on mass murder."
There is an untruth in it that causes your conclusion to fail.
Figure it out.
woof

Just one?

[VADoc]

WiseAmerican wrote:

Rule number one: never chamber a round unless your going to shoot the gun! Rule number two: if the round is chambered, the safety must be on!
Rule number three: if it's a Glock, don't chamber a round-they don't have a safety.
These yahoos are dangerous to everyone around them! At the State House there were people that had loaded AR-15's on shoulder straps with the barrels "face high" walking through the crowd!!!! Stupid idiots!!! They know nothing about gun safety.

Actually Glock and many striker fired pistols have a safety on the trigger. Glock has the trigger safety that requires a set force to disengage the safety and pull the trigger. The reason idiots shoot themselves with glock pistols is because they are dumb and pull the gun out with their finger in the trigger guard.