Take guns out from all these scenarios and there would be no dead, no lives ruined, no multi million dollar trials, no tax $$$$ pay outs and no 100 page erBB threads.but muh gunz muh freedum![]()
But no.
REMINDER: WEIDER PUBLICATIONS, LLC has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, Weider Publications, LLC reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. Weider Publications, LLC has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. Weider Publications, LLC reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that Weider Publications, LLC deems necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Take guns out from all these scenarios and there would be no dead, no lives ruined, no multi million dollar trials, no tax $$$$ pay outs and no 100 page erBB threads.but muh gunz muh freedum![]()
You're incredibly dishonest. He took a gun to protect himself, others, and private property from CRIMINALS. CRIMINALS that you bizarrely seem to think are righteous. Four criminals attacked him. Two paid for it with their lives, one was disarmed and the fourth got lucky.Holy fück.
He went there with a gun to shoot people.
How was he going to “protect” himself or cars with a gun, without shooting someone?You're incredibly dishonest. He took a gun to protect himself, others, and private property from CRIMINALS. CRIMINALS that you bizarrely seem to think are righteous. Four criminals attacked him. Two paid for it with their lives, one was disarmed and the fourth got lucky.
“Only breaking windows”And who did he shoot that was only breaking windows?
The only ones who got shot are the ones who chased him down and engaged with hum. Facts!
Most sane individuals see armed security and move on. The CRIMINALS you fetish over thought they would try to take on an armed man. That didn't work out so hot for them.How was he going to “protect” himself or cars with a gun, without shooting someone?
You don’t go into a volatile situation, openly carrying a semi-auto without intention to actually use it.Most sane individuals see armed security and move on. The CRIMINALS you fetish over thought they would try to take on an armed man. That didn't work out so hot for them.
No. It shows that justice works in some places and not innothersTwo prominent examples, less than a week apart, showing that the US criminal justice systems works.
That’s simply bullshit.You don’t go into a volatile situation, openly carrying a semi-auto without intention to actually use it.
It’s called stirring sh!t, inviting trouble.
Why would you open carry a gun if you don’t intend to use it?That’s simply bullshit.
The problem with you and fecal is that you bizarrely think the looters and rioters are righteous and virtuous .Anyone who goes to a protest or riot at night.....with a gun no less......goes there looking for trouble.
Except you are lying because you’re a fucking liar.The problem with you and fecal is that you bizarrely think the looters and rioters are righteous and virtuous .
Your posting history makes your view of the anti law enforcement rioting and looting movement quite clear. Own it.Except you are lying because you’re a fucking liar.
#zero #integrity #looser
I gotta go with Duffy on this one. KR had powerful video evidence backing up his self-defense claims. Those piece-of-sh!t crackers in Georgia tried to claim self-defense but had no evidence to back it up.No. It shows that justice works in some places and not innothers
Quote me where I disparaged law enforcement or glorfied crminals.Your posting history makes your view of the anti law enforcement rioting and looting movement quite clear. Own it.
Or could it be that the prosecution used the argument that should have been used in both Zimmerman and Rittenhouse trial?I gotta go with Duffy on this one. KR had powerful video evidence backing up his self-defense claims. Those piece-of-sh!t crackers in Georgia tried to claim self-defense but had no evidence to back it up.
Your support of the criminals in this case is stunning.Or could it be that the prosecution used the argument that should have been used in both Zimmerman and Rittenhouse trial?
"You can't create the situation and then go 'I was defending myself'," Ms Dunikoski said, adding that all three defendants had made their decisions because Mr Arbery "was a black man running down the street".
Quote me where I supported criminals or STFU, fucking liar.Your support of the criminals in this case is stunning.
None of the people in these 3 cases defended anything.That would make for a very dangerous legal precident. For example, if during the Rodney King riots, Asian and Latino store owners who were defending their stores with weapons could then be found guilty of killing an attacker because their brandishing of weapons "created the situation".