Man fatally Shoots Self In Head While Giving Gun Safety Lessons

Sorry, I recognized it as humor and laughed. Thanks

 

Matter of fact if I recall correctly, we spend far more time emphasizing the good and decent use of firearms for self defense, something honorable while it's actually in the anti-gunners playbook to use carnage and gruesomeness as a means to garner support for totally unrelated control laws. Good post!

 

Cool. And when I see that with my own two eyes or someone on this thread try that crap out, I will call them out on it.

Really? Benghazi means nothing to you? Try again.

As said by the person who posted to me, instead of acknowledging that someone had died, decided to go on a tangent about how we shouldn't be respectful to the dead.

- - - Updated - - -

1. I don't support gun control.
2. You don't understand what I'm saying. I'm acknowledging someone died, and paying my respects.

 

WTF does that have to do with gun control in the US?

 

I miss read, excuse me. That's just conservatives in general who use the dead for their causes.

 

not when it comes to our 2nd A rights.................and your rebuttal is lame and weak.

 

I didn't rebuttal, I just told you a fact. It's up to you to realize the hypocrisy.

 

I take it you have found a new SCOTUS ruling that changes the current definitions to your favor? Cite please .And if you are to claim such facts, they are only known to you and as such remain simply an opinion

 

Can't fix stupid.

 

I don't believe I'm even talking about the SCOTUS. I was talking about how I have respect for the dead.

 

so do I.........and I don't show it by dragging pictures of dead kids all over the internet or tv media

 

Agreed. Using the unfortunate death of 20 school children for political ends is despicable.

Don't think it is conservatives doing this.

 

Oh really? What about the people that are saying that there should be guns in schools so 20 kids shouldn't have been killed?

 

I think you meant wouldn't.

I would guess the hoplophobes tried to use the tragedy in Connecticutt for their political agenda by a factor of ten over the use of it by those who would prefer to protect children rather than leave them at the mercy of a deranged person.

So do you think it is OK if it supports your stance?

One of the last refuges of politicians is "it's for the children".

 

typical goal post move......dude, yer all over the place

 

While we're at it then...
How far would those bad guys have succeeded if concealed carry were allowed in Chinese train stations?
Norwegian schools?
American military installations?????

 

It says a lot about the government when it disarms the people who are the most trained and experienced with firearms.

 

And that gets us back to why the 2A is NOT obsolete, and is indeed necessary. People from countries that have disarmed their populace love to blabber on and on about how they have drastically reduced firearm fatalities. Bring in the rest of the crime statistics though, which indicate that people who mean to kill will find a way, and they say that we are diverting from their subject. We who are most trained and competent are preventing more murder and mayhem (by far) than bad guys are able to inflict.
There will ALWAYS be murder.
There will ALWAYS be weapons.
There's only one gun here beside me, but there are many "deadly weapons", like this knife, or these scissors, or all of these blunt instruments, like a portable hard drive.
I need the gun here, in case some bad guy gets ahold of one of those!
Of course, I could hope that he's drunk, and wants to show me how these things are used....

 

If the claim is that the right don't bring up the dead, but I show them they do, isn't that part of the goal?

 

So, the answer is yes?

 

you haven't posted on pic of any dead child used by any of the pro-Rights crowd. so that's a nay

 

very sad, and I am sure a lesson the poor girl will never forget

operating a gun under the influence should be treated the same as operating a car under the influence

friends don't let friends drink and operate guns

.

 

And how many armed citizens have actually stopped mass shootings? Outside of Hollywood movies of course

 

If they were stopped, how would we know what they would have done? Kind of a misleading and typical question from the likes of antigunners though. Law enforcement doesn't track stopping someone who might have been a mass shooters and liberal news medias certainly won't report it. Outside of Hollywood though
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/mass-killings-stopped-by-armed-citizens.html

Thanks for playing .... eh?

 

the two that I stopped with my firearm....who knows what the one I shot would have done if I hadn't stopped him. He may have gone on knife and rob others. I may have save 5 lives that night, who knows? The guy that ran off, maybe I changed his life and his ways. Who knows? There is no way to track future events. So Libs must play the what if game to their advantage, they cannot allow themselves to think contrary. It only makes sense to them.
I know that we live in a very violent world and I will not go unprotected.