RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast

RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 9:30:33 PM)
Doubt it will last that long, she will complain the spontaneity went out of their marriage. I hope they dont procreate....altho they will be fairly safe until they are five foot tall

lovmuffin -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 9:36:59 PM)
It's not just the OP but some of the same posters with a different angle aiming (pun intended) at more gun regulation, gun laws, mandatory safety instruction, less availability or whatever. It's all been mentioned in this thread. That must be how I ended up there.

TheHeretic -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 9:39:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic she will complain the spontaneity went out of their marriage. That's the hardest I have laughed so far this year, Lucy. Thanks!

Kirata -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 9:45:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The right to life trumps all other rights Good grief. Wherever did you come up with that little bit of quasi-religious ideology? One's "right to life" is always and everywhere continent on circumstances, meaningless in most of them, capable of being forfeit in others, and in any case completely vacuous absent an effective means to defend it in the first place. K.

Lucylastic -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 9:53:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic she will complain the spontaneity went out of their marriage. That's the hardest I have laughed so far this year, Lucy. Thanks! [:D] i had a feeling it would make you laugh too. Ya welcome

ThirdWheelWanted -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:03:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The right to life trumps all other rights Good grief. Wherever did you come up with that little bit of quasi-religious ideology? One's "right to life" is always and everywhere continent on circumstances, meaningless in most of them, capable of being forfeit in others, and in any case completely vacuous absent an effective means to defend it in the first place. K. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? - One of my favorite quotes about Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

BamaD -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:09:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Firearms are the third-leading cause of injury-related deaths nationwide, following poisoning and motor vehicle accidents. (both of which are regulated...) Gun ownership is regulated. Not effectively nor as aggressively as the situation warrants Really? Where did you get all the details of this situation? I'd love to read the article. Why would I need all the facts of THIS situation to have formed an opinion on the LARGER situation ie:guns ? You've made up your mind, why confuse you with facts?

BamaD -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:13:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Firearms are the third-leading cause of injury-related deaths nationwide, following poisoning and motor vehicle accidents. (both of which are regulated...) Gun ownership is regulated. Not effectively nor as aggressively as the situation warrants Really? Where did you get all the details of this situation? I'd love to read the article. Why would I need all the facts of THIS situation to have formed an opinion on the LARGER situation ie:guns ? I thought this thread was about this situation? How can you use a situation (this one) to support your assertion if you don't know if it supports your assertion? Because my assertion is that there are too many guns.....knowing that she shot her husband through a CLOSED door seems to butress that opinion. is that clear enough ? No it only buttress the opinion that she fired without identifying her target.

BamaD -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:16:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The reactions of pro-fun posters are alarmingly predictable. It doesn't seem to matter how tragic the circumstances, how stupid the behaviour of the people involved, how senseless and avoidable the shootings were. It is never the fault of legal responsible gun wielding people. The tragedy is never the result of the gross over supply and easy availability of guns or inexperienced/untrained/poorly trained people having access to firearms. It's always something else ........ The right to life trumps all other rights and it is this right that is so regularly violated. Second Amendment rights are meaningless to the thousands of victims of legal/illegal gun violence as they lie in their coffins. I'm glad I don't live in a place where the right to bear lethal weapons over rides the right to life. double post

BamaD -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:18:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The reactions of pro-fun posters are alarmingly predictable. It doesn't seem to matter how tragic the circumstances, how stupid the behaviour of the people involved, how senseless and avoidable the shootings were. It is never the fault of legal responsible gun wielding people. The tragedy is never the result of the gross over supply and easy availability of guns or inexperienced/untrained/poorly trained people having access to firearms. It's always something else ........ The right to life trumps all other rights and it is this right that is so regularly violated. Second Amendment rights are meaningless to the thousands of victims of legal/illegal gun violence as they lie in their coffins. I'm glad I don't live in a place where the right to bear lethal weapons over rides the right to life. I am kind of surprised to find out you are part of the pro-life (anti-abortion) movement.

BamaD -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:24:05 PM)
FR It wasn't her gun, it was his. Thus the mandatory training classes would have had no effect, unless you require that everyone who might someday be in the presence of the gun take it.

Kirata -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:44:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The right to life trumps all other rights Good grief. Wherever did you come up with that little bit of quasi-religious ideology? One's "right to life" is always and everywhere continent on circumstances, meaningless in most of them, capable of being forfeit in others, and in any case completely vacuous absent an effective means to defend it in the first place. Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? - One of my favorite quotes about Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thanks, with the added note that "continent" lost a "g"; it was intended to be "contingent". K.

Kirata -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/10/2015 10:45:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I am kind of surprised to find out you are part of the pro-life (anti-abortion) movement. [sm=applause.gif]

DaddySatyr -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/11/2015 1:05:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I am kind of surprised to find out you are part of the pro-life (anti-abortion) movement. I think you've stumbled on to the answer! We just find a way to help the PPLs see that this is just a woman, making a choice to no longer let a "dependent life" leech off of her (and I'm sure he had something to do with ruining her figure, too) and go ahead and end it. [:D] Michael

Lucylastic -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/11/2015 1:59:00 AM)
well its obvious all three of you are pro death for anyone that scares you.....but you gotta force your women into parenthood for the rest of their lives.. bless your liddle hearts Oh dear and to have three of them step on their dicks this early in the morning is SOOOO special. The mating call of the forced birthers who cry and cry about feti, but lose interest in rtl when it comes to anybody elses life and liberty. But hold your guns chaps, they are magical things that make you believe, they will help protect you (oh until they dont ) and give you that special permission to put an end to a fully independent persons life....or a kid like tamir rice.)

tweakabelle -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/11/2015 2:25:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The reactions of pro-fun posters are alarmingly predictable. It doesn't seem to matter how tragic the circumstances, how stupid the behaviour of the people involved, how senseless and avoidable the shootings were. It is never the fault of legal responsible gun wielding people. The tragedy is never the result of the gross over supply and easy availability of guns or inexperienced/untrained/poorly trained people having access to firearms. It's always something else ........ The right to life trumps all other rights and it is this right that is so regularly violated. Second Amendment rights are meaningless to the thousands of victims of legal/illegal gun violence as they lie in their coffins. I'm glad I don't live in a place where the right to bear lethal weapons over rides the right to life. This....again and again THIS Nice post tweak . Stupid post actually. The reactions of anti gun posters, while not alarming are equally predictable. Sure the right to life trumps all other rights so that means we have a right to not be sitting ducks like all those guys in France. If ya want to talk about gun availability, France doesn't have gun availability. They have more regulations and gun control than Chicago and New York City combined. So I have to ask again, where did those assholes get their AK 47's ? I'm glad that we agree that the "right to life trumps all other rights". However the example you chose to make your point - the recent terrorist outrage in France - makes my case more than yours. If gun availability decreases the chances of fatalities occurring, as you seem to be arguing, then the French case disproves the claim. In Paris, there was two armed and trained police officers specifically tasked with protecting the offices and staff of the magazine. If the argument that widespread availability of guns - the 'armed citizen' argument so often touted by the gun lobby - had any validity, the presence of armed and trained guards would have either prevented or reduced the scale of the outrage in Paris. Yet the presence of these two officers failed utterly to prevent the slaughter. All the presence of armed guards seems have achieved is to have increased the level of terrorist violence. Equally if this 'armed citizen' argument had any validity and has more substance than the pie-in-the-sky pro-gun fantasy it sounds like, then incidents of hostage taking and mass slaughter wouldn't occur in areas where there is widespread availability and access to firearms. But incidents of hostage taking and mass slaughter seem to occur with distressing regularity in the USA, where there are more than enough guns to go around. Again the argument fails miserably.

Lucylastic -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/11/2015 2:32:03 AM)
32 gun deaths a day in the US and hes got the nerve to say that more guns would have made the french attacks unviable for terrorists. fantasy world

tweakabelle -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/11/2015 2:34:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle The right to life trumps all other rights Good grief. Wherever did you come up with that little bit of quasi-religious ideology? One's "right to life" is always and everywhere continent on circumstances, meaningless in most of them, capable of being forfeit in others, and in any case completely vacuous absent an effective means to defend it in the first place. K. I'm surprised that you claim that the right to life, which presumably includes your own right to life, is " contin[g]ent(sic) on circumstances, meaningless in most of them, .... and completely vacuous absent an effective means to defend it in the first place." Not all of us regard our right to life as "meaningless". However I am happy to compromise in your case. Can we agree to respect my right to life and that your right to life is meaningless? I know it's not a particularly salubrious offer, but it seems the best available under the circumstances. It is odd that people who are so loud and vocal in insisting on their unfettered right to defend their lives with firearms place this right on a higher level than the right to life itself. The right to defend one's life is utterly contingent on, and subordinate to the right to life itself and meaningless without it. If ever there was a case of putting the cart before the donkey surely this is it.

lovmuffin -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/11/2015 3:28:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic 32 gun deaths a day in the US and hes got the nerve to say that more guns would have made the french attacks unviable for terrorists. fantasy world Yet this isn't what I said entirely. And this goes to tweak also. What I'm saying is with all the gun control in your wildest fantasies like they have over there in France, none of it stopped the availability of those AK 47's. Just because there were a couple of armed policemen doesn't guarantee the good guys will win. They certainly had a fighting chance. Did you ever consider what the outcome might have been if all 12 of those guys had been armed ?If I had been one of those cartoonists I would have wanted my own gun. And tweak, incidents of hostage taking and mass slaughter over here seem to occur in areas where there is not widespread availability and access to firearms. They occur more often in gun free zones like schools where murdering idiots can kill without opposition. Killers generally seek easy prey as apposed to those who might be able to fight back.

Sanity -> RE: Woman accidentally shoots husband who tried to surprise her with breakfast (1/11/2015 4:20:25 AM)
They seem to want a totalitarian police state to keep us "safe" with those who they deride as racist killer cops in total control, No power to defend ourselves and therefore no guaranteed rights

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875