STANTON, Calif. (AP) — A 72-year-old Southern California grandmother who
shot at — and narrowly missed — a man trying to break into her home
said Tuesday she was shocked at the attention her action /was getting but
does not regret defending herself and her husband, an 85-year-old World
War II veteran who uses a wheelchair.
STANTON, Calif. (AP) — A 72-year-old Southern California grandmother who
shot at — and narrowly missed — a man trying to break into her home
said Tuesday she was shocked at the attention her action /was getting but
does not regret defending herself and her husband, an 85-year-old World
War II veteran who uses a wheelchair.
Roadapple... when a doctor prescribes any kind of medication for you, please do not keep your weapon too close.. You may shoot yourself or a family member. Well, please don't shoot a family member.
0
Roadapple... when a doctor prescribes any kind of medication for you, please do not keep your weapon too close.. You may shoot yourself or a family member. Well, please don't shoot a family member.
STANTON, Calif. (AP) — A 72-year-old Southern California grandmother who
shot at — and narrowly missed — a man trying to break into her home
said Tuesday she was shocked at the attention her action /was getting but
does not regret defending herself and her husband, an 85-year-old World
War II veteran who uses a wheelchair.
STANTON, Calif. (AP) — A 72-year-old Southern California grandmother who
shot at — and narrowly missed — a man trying to break into her home
said Tuesday she was shocked at the attention her action /was getting but
does not regret defending herself and her husband, an 85-year-old World
War II veteran who uses a wheelchair.
The right to bear arms is a constitutional right given to us by our founding fathers.
Let us all give praise to our founding fathers.
SirJohnDuke...Did the founding fathers give you the right to bear a bazooka ? Rocket launcher ? Abrams Tank ? Where do we draw the line ? Just saying... because not one person here has answered that very question, they always ignore the question.
If the answer is yes, do we have a right to drive the tank without a special permit ? Just asking .
If anybody can buy a rocker launcher without a permit, do you think that the Boston bombers would rather take down a commercial jet ? Just saying.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SirJohnDrake:
The right to bear arms is a constitutional right given to us by our founding fathers.
Let us all give praise to our founding fathers.
SirJohnDuke...Did the founding fathers give you the right to bear a bazooka ? Rocket launcher ? Abrams Tank ? Where do we draw the line ? Just saying... because not one person here has answered that very question, they always ignore the question.
If the answer is yes, do we have a right to drive the tank without a special permit ? Just asking .
If anybody can buy a rocker launcher without a permit, do you think that the Boston bombers would rather take down a commercial jet ? Just saying.
A grandmother in Milwaukie, Ore., is organizing a "Glock Block," a pistol-packing group of neighbors that she said she hopes will help deter crime in her community.
Coy Tolonen, 65, said the idea came to her last Thursday after she tried and failed to chase down a thief who ran away with her beloved bronze yard statue.
Later that evening, the grandmother of three said she realized a door to her home had been jimmied open, possibly by the same man she said stole her statue.
"It just made my blood run cold because our grandkids are playing here a lot, and one of them could have been snatched just as easily as the statue," she told ABCNews.com.
"These guys need to know if you're going to pick on a little old lady, then lots of the ladies I know are packing [guns]. They're sweet ladies but if it's their life, I'm sorry you're going to lose yours," Tolonen said.
A grandmother in Milwaukie, Ore., is organizing a "Glock Block," a pistol-packing group of neighbors that she said she hopes will help deter crime in her community.
Coy Tolonen, 65, said the idea came to her last Thursday after she tried and failed to chase down a thief who ran away with her beloved bronze yard statue.
Later that evening, the grandmother of three said she realized a door to her home had been jimmied open, possibly by the same man she said stole her statue.
"It just made my blood run cold because our grandkids are playing here a lot, and one of them could have been snatched just as easily as the statue," she told ABCNews.com.
"These guys need to know if you're going to pick on a little old lady, then lots of the ladies I know are packing [guns]. They're sweet ladies but if it's their life, I'm sorry you're going to lose yours," Tolonen said.
SirJohnDuke...Did the founding fathers give you the right to bear a bazooka ? Rocket launcher ? Abrams Tank ? Where do we draw the line ? Just saying... because not one person here has answered that very question, they always ignore the question.
If the answer is yes, do we have a right to drive the tank without a special permit ? Just asking .
If anybody can buy a rocker launcher without a permit, do you think that the Boston bombers would rather take down a commercial jet ? Just saying.
I do not know if they would envision a tank or a rocket launcher, and at no point did they enter the conversation until you made the asinine assertion that gun owners are advocating personal ownership of rocket launchers, it is not even on the table, but you feel good by brining it up because it is commonly understood that regulating tanks and rocket launchers is universally accepted, you are making a weak attempt at making gun owners look ridiculous. Didn't work.
Again, I don't know if the founders would have allowed tanks or rocket launchers (Jefferson might have), but they most certainly would have included small arms to include what the modern soldier carries. The modern musket of our time is the AR-15
Plain and simple if you believe in the second amendment, you believe that It is for a final check on government.
If you feel that it is antiquated, and outdated, then change the constitution, taking away the military capabilities of the populous would require an amendment to be legitimate. In fact all regulation of arms SHOULD require an amendment by definition since the right to own arms CAN NOT be infringed by the govt.
We are probably overdue for an amendment saying you can't have a personal nuclear device. I could see that being a problem.
0
Quote Originally Posted by don juan:
SirJohnDuke...Did the founding fathers give you the right to bear a bazooka ? Rocket launcher ? Abrams Tank ? Where do we draw the line ? Just saying... because not one person here has answered that very question, they always ignore the question.
If the answer is yes, do we have a right to drive the tank without a special permit ? Just asking .
If anybody can buy a rocker launcher without a permit, do you think that the Boston bombers would rather take down a commercial jet ? Just saying.
I do not know if they would envision a tank or a rocket launcher, and at no point did they enter the conversation until you made the asinine assertion that gun owners are advocating personal ownership of rocket launchers, it is not even on the table, but you feel good by brining it up because it is commonly understood that regulating tanks and rocket launchers is universally accepted, you are making a weak attempt at making gun owners look ridiculous. Didn't work.
Again, I don't know if the founders would have allowed tanks or rocket launchers (Jefferson might have), but they most certainly would have included small arms to include what the modern soldier carries. The modern musket of our time is the AR-15
Plain and simple if you believe in the second amendment, you believe that It is for a final check on government.
If you feel that it is antiquated, and outdated, then change the constitution, taking away the military capabilities of the populous would require an amendment to be legitimate. In fact all regulation of arms SHOULD require an amendment by definition since the right to own arms CAN NOT be infringed by the govt.
We are probably overdue for an amendment saying you can't have a personal nuclear device. I could see that being a problem.
Better than shooting the dog--it's the owner's fault.
This is the ignorant mentality that I'm talking about... Blame to owner, blame the dog, but Oh No, we can't blame the gun owner , he has every right to shoot anybody ! SICK
0
Quote Originally Posted by speak2truth:
Better than shooting the dog--it's the owner's fault.
This is the ignorant mentality that I'm talking about... Blame to owner, blame the dog, but Oh No, we can't blame the gun owner , he has every right to shoot anybody ! SICK
This is the ignorant mentality that I'm talking about... Blame to owner, blame the dog, but Oh No, we can't blame the gun owner , he has every right to shoot anybody ! SICK
Just the opposite. We do blame the owner. What it is we don't do is blame the gun.
0
Quote Originally Posted by don juan:
This is the ignorant mentality that I'm talking about... Blame to owner, blame the dog, but Oh No, we can't blame the gun owner , he has every right to shoot anybody ! SICK
Just the opposite. We do blame the owner. What it is we don't do is blame the gun.
I absolutely blame gun Dealers and the NRA and lobbyist, they all are in cahoots. The greedy Sons of Witches. Twenty children's faces blown off and they don't even adjust a little, they are sick.
0
I absolutely blame gun Dealers and the NRA and lobbyist, they all are in cahoots. The greedy Sons of Witches. Twenty children's faces blown off and they don't even adjust a little, they are sick.
Here we go again using the image of dead children in an attempt to further your political agenda.
How do you know all of their "faces were blown off "Don. Do you have a link for that or were you just trying to create a ghoulish image to punctuate your political stance.
You are very sick.
Get help.
0
Here we go again using the image of dead children in an attempt to further your political agenda.
How do you know all of their "faces were blown off "Don. Do you have a link for that or were you just trying to create a ghoulish image to punctuate your political stance.
ALL gun laws are designed to keep children safe....
garbage we have a federal law, the 90 school zone free gun act....
Obviously it didn't work... 20 children massacred. It was so horrific that children and teachers were told not to look up on their way out. Police said they saw faces blown away, some are still in counseling today.
And do you think the NRA and weapon advocates/fruitcakes give squat ? NOPE, they say "let's wait until it all calms down, then we can fight gun control. We'll NOT ME ! I will remind everyone from here until election day and BEYOND !
0
Quote Originally Posted by Stiln:
Rick, think about all gun laws..........
ALL gun laws are designed to keep children safe....
garbage we have a federal law, the 90 school zone free gun act....
Obviously it didn't work... 20 children massacred. It was so horrific that children and teachers were told not to look up on their way out. Police said they saw faces blown away, some are still in counseling today.
And do you think the NRA and weapon advocates/fruitcakes give squat ? NOPE, they say "let's wait until it all calms down, then we can fight gun control. We'll NOT ME ! I will remind everyone from here until election day and BEYOND !
Wow, that is weird that criminals disobeyed the no gun zone signs.
I thought for sure it would work, along with the assault weapons ban in conn. , also the fact that the guy was rejected for a firearms purchase by the current NICs background check.
Oh, and he had to commit murder and theft to get the firearms he used in the crimes.
Other than those hundreds of violations he committed to commit his acts of crime, I suppose a few more laws would have stopped him in his tracks.
You are not insane, or morbid or ghoulish, you are pretty smart. To continue to equate children with blown away faces with the idea that banning guns will stop such horror.
It is a common tactic, and completely bad logic, but if you say a lie over and over again it starts to sound like the truth.
Like the idea that gun crime is on the rise (it has been declining fo r40 years), but if you keep telling people that you need to keep them safe by taking away their rights and property, then you might get some to agree with you. (most people don't check facts) .
Don I am so sick of the gun debate.
I will summarize my position again for you, and kind of leave it at that.
-It is our right
-gun control and bans are ineffective (DC and Chicago)
-the weapons you refer to as "ASSAULT WEAPONS" are used in less than .7 % of crimes.
- if you want to change the law, you need a constitutional Amendment amending the 2nd amendment. Point blank, I think that this should be the standard.
0
Wow, that is weird that criminals disobeyed the no gun zone signs.
I thought for sure it would work, along with the assault weapons ban in conn. , also the fact that the guy was rejected for a firearms purchase by the current NICs background check.
Oh, and he had to commit murder and theft to get the firearms he used in the crimes.
Other than those hundreds of violations he committed to commit his acts of crime, I suppose a few more laws would have stopped him in his tracks.
You are not insane, or morbid or ghoulish, you are pretty smart. To continue to equate children with blown away faces with the idea that banning guns will stop such horror.
It is a common tactic, and completely bad logic, but if you say a lie over and over again it starts to sound like the truth.
Like the idea that gun crime is on the rise (it has been declining fo r40 years), but if you keep telling people that you need to keep them safe by taking away their rights and property, then you might get some to agree with you. (most people don't check facts) .
Don I am so sick of the gun debate.
I will summarize my position again for you, and kind of leave it at that.
-It is our right
-gun control and bans are ineffective (DC and Chicago)
-the weapons you refer to as "ASSAULT WEAPONS" are used in less than .7 % of crimes.
- if you want to change the law, you need a constitutional Amendment amending the 2nd amendment. Point blank, I think that this should be the standard.
Obviously it didn't work... 20 children massacred. It was so horrific that children and teachers were told not to look up on their way out. Police said they saw faces blown away, some are still in counseling today.
It is already illegal to kill 20 children in a school.
It is already illegal to drive to a school with a loaded rifle or any type of firearm and bring it into the school.
It is already illegal to shoot your mother and steal her guns.
Your posts on this topic make no sense.
0
Quote Originally Posted by don juan:
Obviously it didn't work... 20 children massacred. It was so horrific that children and teachers were told not to look up on their way out. Police said they saw faces blown away, some are still in counseling today.
It is already illegal to kill 20 children in a school.
It is already illegal to drive to a school with a loaded rifle or any type of firearm and bring it into the school.
It is already illegal to shoot your mother and steal her guns.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Well, please don't shoot a family member.
Hot Forum Topics
