What is better, no guns, or more guns?

[boyst]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/04/10/at-least-3-reportedly-shot-at-san-bernardino-elementary-school.html

 

 

Two adults, one male and one female, were shot and killed at a California elementary school Monday in what police believe to be a murder-suicide and two students were rushed to a hospital with critical injuries.

San Bernardino Police Captain Ron Maass said the male suspect arrived to visit the female instructor in her classroom at North Park Elementary school in San Bernardino when he opened fire and killed the teacher and wounded two students before turning the gun on himself.

[/dev/null]

Maybe they should put the Gun Free School Zone© sign up next to the one informing visitors to check in at the office

[Nanker]

Maybe they should put the Gun Free School Zone© sign up next to the one informing visitors to check in at the office

Or maybe pass a new law. Ya know... make it illegal to shoot and/or kill someone with a handgun. Damned NRA.

[boyst]

todd heap proves the actual danger is trucks. not guns. how many have died from trucks this year?

 

ban trucks!

[Tiberius]

An employee for the National Rifle Association accidentally shot himself Thursday during a firearms training session.

 

The 46-year-old man was holstering his pistol when it accidentally discharged, NBC Washington reports. The incident happened at the NRA’s National Firearms Museum, located at the organization’s headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia.

 

Fairfax County Police confirmed the incident to The Huffington Post, stating that the 46-year-old man was treated at a local hospital for a minor wound on his lower body. No charges are expected.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nra-employee-shoots-himself_us_58e7f971e4b00de1410384e7

[/dev/null]

An employee for the National Rifle Association accidentally shot himself Thursday during a firearms training session.

 

The 46-year-old man was holstering his pistol when it accidentally discharged, NBC Washington reports. The incident happened at the NRA’s National Firearms Museum, located at the organization’s headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia.

 

Fairfax County Police confirmed the incident to The Huffington Post, stating that the 46-year-old man was treated at a local hospital for a minor wound on his lower body. No charges are expected.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nra-employee-shoots-himself_us_58e7f971e4b00de1410384e7

 

Professionals who handle the same equipment every day can sometimes take their eye off the ball resulting in an accident

 

Thanks for the reminder to always be mindful of gun safety

[/dev/null]

Somebody forgot to tell those women and children refugees fleeing the Middle East that automatic weapons are illegal in France

[grinreaper]

http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2016/05/03/huffpo-shooting-attackers-self-defense-denies-criminals-fair-trial/

 

In a recent essay, a Huffington Post writer makes the incredible argument that while the Second Amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to carry and stockpile arms, it does not give the right to shoot violent attackers in self-defense because to do so would deny assailants a fair trial.

If the reasoning sounds convoluted, that’s because it is.

Although author Justin Curmi declares that the Second Amendment is highly contested, he also states that there is “no doubt” about citizens’ rights to keep and bear arms; it’s using them that’s the problem. In fact, he believes it is illegal.

“Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights,” Curmi declares.

 

Since everyone has the right to a fair trial, Curmi argues, it must therefore be illegal to curtail an attacker’s right by using lethal violence against him to defend oneself. He seems to assume that the crafters of the Second Amendment believed that citizens should be able to keep and bear arms without intending that the weapons ever be used, which stretches the imagination to the breaking point.

[Koko78]

http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2016/05/03/huffpo-shooting-attackers-self-defense-denies-criminals-fair-trial/

 

In a recent essay, a Huffington Post writer makes the incredible argument that while the Second Amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to carry and stockpile arms, it does not give the right to shoot violent attackers in self-defense because to do so would deny assailants a fair trial.

If the reasoning sounds convoluted, that’s because it is.

Although author Justin Curmi declares that the Second Amendment is highly contested, he also states that there is “no doubt” about citizens’ rights to keep and bear arms; it’s using them that’s the problem. In fact, he believes it is illegal.

“Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights,” Curmi declares.

 

Since everyone has the right to a fair trial, Curmi argues, it must therefore be illegal to curtail an attacker’s right by using lethal violence against him to defend oneself. He seems to assume that the crafters of the Second Amendment believed that citizens should be able to keep and bear arms without intending that the weapons ever be used, which stretches the imagination to the breaking point.

 

I'm surprised these dingbats haven't tried to claim that while owning guns is constitutional, possessing ammunition is not a right covered by the 2nd amendment.

[Azalin]

 

“Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights,” Curmi declares.

 

 

And I'll be defending myself in court during my attacker's funeral. I can live with that.

[TakeYouToTasker]

http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2016/05/03/huffpo-shooting-attackers-self-defense-denies-criminals-fair-trial/

 

In a recent essay, a Huffington Post writer makes the incredible argument that while the Second Amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to carry and stockpile arms, it does not give the right to shoot violent attackers in self-defense because to do so would deny assailants a fair trial.

If the reasoning sounds convoluted, that’s because it is.

Although author Justin Curmi declares that the Second Amendment is highly contested, he also states that there is “no doubt” about citizens’ rights to keep and bear arms; it’s using them that’s the problem. In fact, he believes it is illegal.

“Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights,” Curmi declares.

 

Since everyone has the right to a fair trial, Curmi argues, it must therefore be illegal to curtail an attacker’s right by using lethal violence against him to defend oneself. He seems to assume that the crafters of the Second Amendment believed that citizens should be able to keep and bear arms without intending that the weapons ever be used, which stretches the imagination to the breaking point.

The clear absurdity is that one cannot logically expect to be protected by a moral philosophy which they are in the process of violating.

 

An individual forfeits their rights while in the commission of the violation of the rights of another.

[GoBills808]

 

And I'll be defending myself in court during my attacker's funeral. I can live with that.

As could I, provided we're clear on what constitutes 'attacker'.

[Nanker]

Guns don't kill people. Planned Parenthood does.

[grinreaper]

Guns don't kill people. Planned Parenthood does.

I like it.

[KD in CA]

In a recent essay, a Huffington Post writer makes the incredible argument that while the Second Amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to carry and stockpile arms, it does not give the right to shoot violent attackers in self-defense because to do so would deny assailants a fair trial.

 

 

He must be very upset this guy only got to kill one before a customer put him down:

 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/arlington/2017/05/03/two-people-killed-third-wounded-arlington-restaurant-shooting-reports-say

 

Funny how the MSM has completely ignored this would-be 'mass shooting'

[Gary M]

http://americangg.net/student-concealed-handgun-stops-stabbing/

[/dev/null]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/new-rush-for-guns-london-underscores-importance-of-self-defense/article/2624952

[B-Man]

Gravedancer Shannon Watts exploits victims of Orlando shooting, calls gun owners terrorists

Edited June 11, 2017 by B-Man

[B-Man]

I don't agree...............but using the Left's playbook against them is kind of satisfying.........

 

CIVIL RIGHTS UPDATE: New bill would make gun owners protected class under state human rights act.

 

“Pennsylvania is considering making gun owners a protected class of citizens with proposed changes to the Pennsylvania Human Rights Act (PHRA).

 

The new bill, which was introduced by two dozen Republican representatives and one Democrat, would prevent employers from discriminating against employees who own or carry firearms.”

[Chef Jim]

Why on earth do we need a law for this? Doesn't the 2nd Amendment cover this?