Another School Massacre

My doors are always locked.

Not sure what the sign has to do with the conversation. You asked how many people back into the wild west had their guns locked up and accidental shootings.

I was pointing out that we no longer live in the wild west where people left their times unsecured. I believe guns would be secured when not in use and no ones home.
 
That's not what the wild west infers......it was all about lawlessness, much like we are approaching now.....

Locked door meets 12 ddd boot....LOL
 
Like I said before, Semi-automatics for the hypocrites and their children , sling-shots and a free can of mace, just like the one Dog has, for everyone else !

Hope the PoPo don't mistake your mace, for a real weapon dog !
 
So your home is open to the public and everyone is welcome? Fool! Why don't you turn your nitwit legal logic on the criminals breaking into homes and stealing guns and other personal property and stay the phuck out of my business? I don't have children in my home and my wife is well versed on how to use a firearm, no need to put them in a safe where they are useless in an emergency.

If someone breaks into my home and steals my gun/s, I report it to the police and buy another one. If that stolen gun is used to jack you or your wife up, that's your problem, not mine! Have a nice day.

I have locks on my doors. Most people are welcome. You SHOULD keep your gun accessible when you are home, kids or no kids, otherwise having a gun in a safe is useless.

however, when you and the wife leave the house and do not take the weapons with you, you should lock them up so your collective stupidity doesnt become anyone elses problem.

And ,if not,Hopefully you AND your wife get jacked with your own stolen weapon before you get to the store. (nah, i dont mean that)

Rights come with responsibility. Own up to them. It is your civic duty.
 
Rights come with responsibility. Own up to them. It is your civic duty.

Good point, then with that said, everyone has to keep and bear arms as their civic duty. Police response times high due to crime rate vs police on duty improves. Local breakins drop due to the armed citizen, store armed robberies plummet due to everybody packing.....suddenly life is good...everybody in society is equally carrying the responsibility of personal protection, instead of leaving it to someone else. Everyone equally enjoys domestic tranquility by law.
 
There are so many holes in your version of a perfect world.......people will shoot each other in the back. You think road rage is scary? How about someone with anger management issues shooting you over a parking lot fender bender? Or everyone in the aurora theater shooting blindly in the dark? Nah. I firmly believe that most drivers on the road should not have a license. I believe the same about people and guns. Say, i heard thAt gun owners of america and the nra are competing calling the other weak. You sure you're not weak minded and susceptible to propoganda?
 
And ,if not,Hopefully you AND your wife get jacked with your own stolen weapon before you get to the store. (nah, i dont mean that)

You bring up an interesting point. Let's look at the numbers. If 60% of the guns used in the commission of a crime are stolen, the odds are quite high that quite a number of the crimes committed with guns that were stolen. Given that there are over 300 million guns in the US, the odds are that some of you gun nuts who don't want to lock up your guns are going to get robbed by someone with a stolen gun.

I love irony.</p>
 
"Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

WASHINGTON, June 27 - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation."

http://www.nytimes.c...cotus.html?_r=0

The police don't have to protect you and you don't want to protect yourself.

Good luck.
 
"Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

WASHINGTON, June 27 - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation."

http://www.nytimes.c...cotus.html?_r=0

The police don't have to protect you and you don't want to protect yourself.

Good luck.

Maybe some people prefer to beat the intruder to death with a phone after dialing 911.

I prefer the Indiana Jones method of dealing with a threat. There are benefits to being an NRA life member. I don't have to use a sword or phone to defend my home.

 

Latest posts

Back
Top