Chef Jim Posted December 14, 2015 Posted December 14, 2015 (edited) I actually think she's kinda cute. Well from behind most of them are. We're still taking the wife right? Edited December 14, 2015 by Chef Jim
3rdnlng Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Well from behind most of them are. We're still taking the wife right? I have no desire to team up with you and take another man's wife.
B-Man Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 In President Obama's 894 word Newtown remembrance facebook post 805 words are about gun control. 89 honoring victims. and (of course), I am sure that you know who the picture was............................................................ https://www.facebook.com/potus/photos/a.428389484017564.1073741830.424207551102424/434484206741425/?type=1&theater Mr.Obama lacks the requisite emotional maturity; a narcissist, he can only respond by invoking his own needs.
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 In President Obama's 894 word Newtown remembrance facebook post 805 words are about gun control. 89 honoring victims. and (of course), I am sure that you know who the picture was............................................................ https://www.facebook.com/potus/photos/a.428389484017564.1073741830.424207551102424/434484206741425/?type=1&theater Mr.Obama lacks the requisite emotional maturity; a narcissist, he can only respond by invoking his own needs. That was one of the most pathetic things I ever read. Good job not remembering/honoring the dead Mr President and using the anniversary to push an agenda.
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 In President Obama's 894 word Newtown remembrance facebook post 805 words are about gun control. 89 honoring victims. and (of course), I am sure that you know who the picture was............................................................ https://www.facebook.com/potus/photos/a.428389484017564.1073741830.424207551102424/434484206741425/?type=1&theater Mr.Obama lacks the requisite emotional maturity; a narcissist, he can only respond by invoking his own needs. In honor of the federal government continually trying to restrict law abiding citizens 2nd ammendment rights, and the NYsafe act that was ramrodded through using Sandy hook as supposed justification to restrict gun ownership rights, I just bought my first gun. I couldn't be happier. For me it's quite a change because 10 years ago never once had I considered or even had a desire to own a gun.
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 In honor of the federal government continually trying to restrict law abiding citizens 2nd ammendment rights, and the NYsafe act that was ramrodded through using Sandy hook as supposed justification to restrict gun ownership rights, I just bought my first gun. I couldn't be happier. For me it's quite a change because 10 years ago never once had I considered or even had a desire to own a gun. I was the same a couple years ago. My purchase had nothing to do with my Second Amendment rights or fear of the government. It was my wife and wanting to protect herself after our house was broken in to.
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 I was the same a couple years ago. My purchase had nothing to do with my Second Amendment rights or fear of the government. It was my wife and wanting to protect herself after our house was broken in to. My main reason was wanting to protect .y family. My motivation was stop procrastinating and do it now, it's only going to get harder and harder.
Bob in Mich Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 'A Good Guy With a Gun', a segment on last night's Daily Show, made some interesting points. I will say, I have seen funnier segments. Jordan Klepper misses on quite a few jokes, imo This is the entire show but I think (after the ad) you can skip to about the 4 minute, 15 second mark for Jordan's gun story http://www.cc.com/full-episodes/vowh47/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-december-10--2015---michael-strahan-season-21-ep-21036 Note, some bad language that may not be bleeped out. Anybody watch this? According to the FBI agent in this video, FBI statistics claim that active shooter situations between 2000-2013 were effectively handled by an amateur 'good guy with a gun' in about 3% of those situations.
FireChan Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Anybody watch this? According to the FBI agent in this video, FBI statistics claim that active shooter situations between 2000-2013 were effectively handled by an amateur 'good guy with a gun' in about 3% of those situations. Show me the actual statistic. I don't trust Comedy Central to adequately present anything.
Bob in Mich Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-2000-2013 Under Resolutions on page 11
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Anybody watch this? According to the FBI agent in this video, FBI statistics claim that active shooter situations between 2000-2013 were effectively handled by an amateur 'good guy with a gun' in about 3% of those situations. Then luckily in 3% of situations lives were saved. Too bad more good guys weren't able to stop shooters.
FireChan Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-2000-2013 Under Resolutions on page 11 There's no data on potential shootings thwarted, just ones that occurred. If some guy whipped out a gun at the local Starbucks and got shot without harming anybody, he wouldn't make the list.
sodbuster Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Anybody watch this? According to the FBI agent in this video, FBI statistics claim that active shooter situations between 2000-2013 were effectively handled by an amateur 'good guy with a gun' in about 3% of those situations. Only two percent of Americans carry, and that doesn't mean they carry all of the time. Couple that with the fact that a lot of these shootings that people would have us believe that we are talking about happen in areas where carry is prohibited. It's like starving somebody and then scolding them for being skinny.
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-2000-2013 Under Resolutions on page 11 Only 5% of term insurance policies ever pay out. People don't want to have to use them they have them just for that peace of mind knowing their families are protected. It's the same here. I know you're talking about active shooter cases but a vast majority of gun owners don't have cc permits they have them at home for that peace of mind knowing their families are protected.
Bob in Mich Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Anybody watch this? According to the FBI agent in this video, FBI statistics claim that active shooter situations between 2000-2013 were effectively handled by an amateur 'good guy with a gun' in about 3% of those situations. There were also a couple of other interesting points in that comedy routine. According to the FBI agent, about 20% of those active shooter situations were halted by an unarmed, potential victim overpowering the shooter. This is the very reason that many people think that limiting the magazine sizes that are readily available could save lives in some cases. That pause is worth a lot to potential victims. Why is preventing that pause so important to the enthusiasts? When Jordan Klepper got put into an active shooting scenario at an elementary school as the 'good guy with a gun', he accidentally shot an innocent, did not shoot either bad guy, got shot about 20 times by the 2 bad guys, and then got shot by the arriving police as he was mistaken for the shooter.
Nanker Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Well then, that settles it. I'm handing in all my guns ASAP. Who should I hand them over to? Don't say the Police. They'll just keep them and use them for themselves. That won't make anyone any safer... including me. And, I'm trying to do the right thing by your anecdotal tale of woe, and misery, and mistaken identity. I don't want the police to shoot me, but I don't want the bad guys to shoot me either. Aw Hell, I'll just keep my guns and take my chances.
4merper4mer Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Well then, that settles it. I'm handing in all my guns ASAP. Who should I hand them over to? Don't say the Police. They'll just keep them and use them for themselves. That won't make anyone any safer... including me. And, I'm trying to do the right thing by your anecdotal tale of woe, and misery, and mistaken identity. I don't want the police to shoot me, but I don't want the bad guys to shoot me either. Aw Hell, I'll just keep my guns and take my chances. You could shove a little soil down the barrel and grow pot out of it. You could save the world............TWICE.
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 (edited) There were also a couple of other interesting points in that comedy routine. According to the FBI agent, about 20% of those active shooter situations were halted by an unarmed, potential victim overpowering the shooter. This is the very reason that many people think that limiting the magazine sizes that are readily available could save lives in some cases. That pause is worth a lot to potential victims. Why is preventing that pause so important to the enthusiasts? When Jordan Klepper got put into an active shooting scenario at an elementary school as the 'good guy with a gun', he accidentally shot an innocent, did not shoot either bad guy, got shot about 20 times by the 2 bad guys, and then got shot by the arriving police as he was mistaken for the shooter. Because if there is an intruder in my house at 3 am, and I'm trying to orient myself while coming out of a deep sleep trying to protect my family, I don't need the government telling me how many times I can fire my gun before having to attach a new magazine. Edited December 15, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Because if there is an intruder in my house at 3 am, and I'm trying to orient myself while coming out of a deep sleep trying to protect my family, I don't need the government telling me how many times I can fire my gun before having to attach a new magazine. Sounds like someone needs more range time.
Bob in Mich Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Because if there is an intruder in my house at 3 am, and I'm trying to orient myself while coming out of a deep sleep trying to protect my family, I don't need the government telling me how many times I can fire my gun before having to attach a new magazine. You have to arm yourself to an extent that you enough to firepower to compete with the intruder, right? If that is right, why not consider ways of limiting the firepower available to future potential intruders? It seems to me that many enthusiasts are crossing their arms and saying, 'No, there is nothing that can be done. There is no control measure that is acceptable' Who here is in that camp?
Recommended Posts