Don White wrote:
"Harry" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...
Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.
A reasonable person might assume that the NRA is owned & run by the gun
manufacturers.
Any responsible gun owner shouldn't object to stringent regulations to
keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, unstable or violent people
etc.


Dammit Don. Are you trying to disarm me?



Yes...you & the entire Dopey Army...... for the sake of American children
everywhere.



I believe while you were away, flajim revealed himself (by accident) as
one of the ID spoofers. He was caught, then he went into denial.

Apparently at the same time, his wife left him for...a cucumber.

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 13:55:20 -0500, Harry
wrote:

Don White wrote:
"Harry" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...
Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.
A reasonable person might assume that the NRA is owned & run by the gun
manufacturers.
Any responsible gun owner shouldn't object to stringent regulations to
keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, unstable or violent people
etc.


Dammit Don. Are you trying to disarm me?



Yes...you & the entire Dopey Army...... for the sake of American children
everywhere.



I believe while you were away, flajim revealed himself (by accident) as
one of the ID spoofers. He was caught, then he went into denial.

Apparently at the same time, his wife left him for...a cucumber.

I heard it was the fruits and vegetable manager at the local
supermarket.

"Harry" wrote in message
news
Don White wrote:
"Harry" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...
Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.
A reasonable person might assume that the NRA is owned & run by the gun
manufacturers.
Any responsible gun owner shouldn't object to stringent regulations to
keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, unstable or violent people
etc.


Dammit Don. Are you trying to disarm me?



Yes...you & the entire Dopey Army...... for the sake of American children
everywhere.

I believe while you were away, flajim revealed himself (by accident) as
one of the ID spoofers. He was caught, then he went into denial.

Apparently at the same time, his wife left him for...a cucumber.


There was no doubt that he was one of the cheap imitations.
The other one (ones) could be Looneytunes, Jackoff, Ditzy Dan....or even
Waylon Smithers.
Do you think The Freak is still fooled by them?

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 14:24:51 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 01:19:22 -0800, jps wrote:


Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.

Gosh..... "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" actually "discovered" a study
that proved their point....! OH! they commissioned the study!!!! Well
who did they hire? They hired:

http://www.theworddoctors.com/expertise.html

Do they seek the truth in scientific accumulation and evaluation of
data (aren't they Fair and Balanced)? Oh, hell no.... What, then do
they do? They twist words and lie by deceptive innuendo....

"Remember, what matters is not what you say. Its what people hear."

Fooling people on questionnaires is a very old, very dishonest form of
lying....actually making other people lie without realizing it.... I'm
not sure what magically misleading terms these folks would use to
describe what they *REALLY* do, but I'm sure they'll say something you
can agree with, if you pay them enough.....

These guys are playing both sides of the conservative fence.... weekly
crap for FOX News and then "proving" that the NRA doesn't represent
gun owners....

Are you citing the study Frank Luntz did?

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:55:06 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:02:06 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 14:24:51 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 01:19:22 -0800, jps wrote:


Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.

Gosh..... "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" actually "discovered" a study
that proved their point....! OH! they commissioned the study!!!! Well
who did they hire? They hired:

http://www.theworddoctors.com/expertise.html

Do they seek the truth in scientific accumulation and evaluation of
data (aren't they Fair and Balanced)? Oh, hell no.... What, then do
they do? They twist words and lie by deceptive innuendo....

"Remember, what matters is not what you say. Its what people hear."

Fooling people on questionnaires is a very old, very dishonest form of
lying....actually making other people lie without realizing it.... I'm
not sure what magically misleading terms these folks would use to
describe what they *REALLY* do, but I'm sure they'll say something you
can agree with, if you pay them enough.....

These guys are playing both sides of the conservative fence.... weekly
crap for FOX News and then "proving" that the NRA doesn't represent
gun owners....

Are you citing the study Frank Luntz did?

Give me your cite....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...120903312.html

Read the article Gene.

Frank Luntz was paid to perform the services but he's by no means a
left wing stooge, which is what you'd claim if he was.

I suggest you look further into how he framed his questions if you
want to impune the veracity of his study.

Your religious zeal comes into full bloom when you're tested on this
subject so perhaps you should take a step back before your knee hits
the keyboard again.

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:42:36 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:55:06 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:02:06 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 14:24:51 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 01:19:22 -0800, jps wrote:


Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.

Gosh..... "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" actually "discovered" a study
that proved their point....! OH! they commissioned the study!!!! Well
who did they hire? They hired:

http://www.theworddoctors.com/expertise.html

Do they seek the truth in scientific accumulation and evaluation of
data (aren't they Fair and Balanced)? Oh, hell no.... What, then do
they do? They twist words and lie by deceptive innuendo....

"Remember, what matters is not what you say. Its what people hear."

Fooling people on questionnaires is a very old, very dishonest form of
lying....actually making other people lie without realizing it.... I'm
not sure what magically misleading terms these folks would use to
describe what they *REALLY* do, but I'm sure they'll say something you
can agree with, if you pay them enough.....

These guys are playing both sides of the conservative fence.... weekly
crap for FOX News and then "proving" that the NRA doesn't represent
gun owners....

Are you citing the study Frank Luntz did?

Give me your cite....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...120903312.html

Read the article Gene.

Frank Luntz was paid to perform the services but he's by no means a
left wing stooge, which is what you'd claim if he was.

I suggest you look further into how he framed his questions if you
want to impune the veracity of his study.


"impune"? There's a lonely, forlorn "g" floating around out there
somewhere in the melancholy land of misguided liberal rebuttals. And
it never hurts to take an extra "e" on the end of a word just for good
measure.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On Jan 3, 10:55*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:42:36 -0800, jps wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:55:06 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:02:06 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 14:24:51 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 01:19:22 -0800, jps wrote:

Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements..

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.

Gosh..... "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" actually "discovered" a study
that proved their point....! *OH! they commissioned the study!!!! Well
who did they hire? They hired:

http://www.theworddoctors.com/expertise.html

Do they seek the truth in scientific accumulation and evaluation of
data (aren't they Fair and Balanced)? Oh, hell no.... What, then do
they do? They twist words and lie by deceptive innuendo....

"Remember, what matters is not what you say. *Its what people hear."

Fooling people on questionnaires is a very old, very dishonest form of
lying....actually making other people lie without realizing it.... I'm
not sure what magically misleading terms these folks would use to
describe what they *REALLY* do, but I'm sure they'll say something you
can agree with, if you pay them enough.....

These guys are playing both sides of the conservative fence.... weekly
crap for FOX News and then "proving" that the NRA doesn't represent
gun owners....

Are you citing the study Frank Luntz did?

Give me your cite....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/12/09/AR200...

Read the article Gene. *

Frank Luntz was paid to perform the services but he's by no means a
left wing stooge, which is what you'd claim if he was.

I suggest you look further into how he framed his questions if you
want to impune the veracity of his study.

"impune"? *There's a lonely, forlorn "g" floating around out there
somewhere in the melancholy land of misguided liberal rebuttals. *And
it never hurts to take an extra "e" on the end of a word just for good
measure.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
* * * * * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Im`pune´
a. 1. Unpunished.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by C. & G.
Merriam Co.

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 11:10:27 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

On Jan 3, 10:55*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:42:36 -0800, jps wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:55:06 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:02:06 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 14:24:51 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 01:19:22 -0800, jps wrote:

Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.

Gosh..... "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" actually "discovered" a study
that proved their point....! *OH! they commissioned the study!!!! Well
who did they hire? They hired:

http://www.theworddoctors.com/expertise.html

Do they seek the truth in scientific accumulation and evaluation of
data (aren't they Fair and Balanced)? Oh, hell no.... What, then do
they do? They twist words and lie by deceptive innuendo....

"Remember, what matters is not what you say. *Its what people hear."

Fooling people on questionnaires is a very old, very dishonest form of
lying....actually making other people lie without realizing it.... I'm
not sure what magically misleading terms these folks would use to
describe what they *REALLY* do, but I'm sure they'll say something you
can agree with, if you pay them enough.....

These guys are playing both sides of the conservative fence.... weekly
crap for FOX News and then "proving" that the NRA doesn't represent
gun owners....

Are you citing the study Frank Luntz did?

Give me your cite....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/12/09/AR200...

Read the article Gene. *

Frank Luntz was paid to perform the services but he's by no means a
left wing stooge, which is what you'd claim if he was.

I suggest you look further into how he framed his questions if you
want to impune the veracity of his study.

"impune"? *There's a lonely, forlorn "g" floating around out there
somewhere in the melancholy land of misguided liberal rebuttals. *And
it never hurts to take an extra "e" on the end of a word just for good
measure.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
* * * * * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Im`pune´
a. 1. Unpunished.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by C. & G.
Merriam Co.

This is the definition of the word that fits the context of the text;

Main Entry: im·pugn
Pronunciation: \im-'pyün\
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French empugner, from Latin
inpugnare, from in- + pugnare to fight — more at pungent
Date: 14th century
1 : to assail by words or arguments : oppose or attack as false or
lacking integrity impugned the defendant's character

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Gene wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:42:36 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:55:06 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:02:06 -0800, jps wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 14:24:51 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 01:19:22 -0800, jps wrote:

Gun owners and the NRA may not be on same page

Hard to know who to root for and who to hiss when you run across a
stand-off between notorious Republican strategist Frank Luntz and the
scare-mongering behemoth otherwise known as the National Rifle
Association.

This round, let's listen to Luntz:

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A.
members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the
alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat
rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of
N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that
invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to
suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69
percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing
federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

So ... a majority of gun owners want the gun-show loophole closed,
favor restrictions on banned gun purchases and think it's a good idea
to have gun information shared between agencies. Makes you wonder how
reasonable their views would be if they weren't being pumped up by
propaganda and warned to lock and load every election by the rich gun
lobby.

Posted by SusanG at Kos.
Gosh..... "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" actually "discovered" a study
that proved their point....! OH! they commissioned the study!!!! Well
who did they hire? They hired:

http://www.theworddoctors.com/expertise.html

Do they seek the truth in scientific accumulation and evaluation of
data (aren't they Fair and Balanced)? Oh, hell no.... What, then do
they do? They twist words and lie by deceptive innuendo....

"Remember, what matters is not what you say. Its what people hear."

Fooling people on questionnaires is a very old, very dishonest form of
lying....actually making other people lie without realizing it.... I'm
not sure what magically misleading terms these folks would use to
describe what they *REALLY* do, but I'm sure they'll say something you
can agree with, if you pay them enough.....

These guys are playing both sides of the conservative fence.... weekly
crap for FOX News and then "proving" that the NRA doesn't represent
gun owners....
Are you citing the study Frank Luntz did?
Give me your cite....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...120903312.html

Read the article Gene.

Frank Luntz was paid to perform the services but he's by no means a
left wing stooge, which is what you'd claim if he was.

No, I'll take that opportunity, now. They are right wing nut cases
that will distort any study or wordsmith any statement to get the
desired result.... the result paid for. In this case they were paid to
be left wing stooges....

I suggest you look further into how he framed his questions if you
want to impune the veracity of his study.

I suggest you show me where to see this. Thus far, they have only
released the "results" and told us to watch for the study to come out
so we can see the results....... huh?

Your religious zeal comes into full bloom when you're tested on this
subject so perhaps you should take a step back before your knee hits
the keyboard again.

From your cite:
"Mayor Tom Barrett of Milwaukee said in an interview that he and his
colleagues are trying to send a clear message to gun owners: "If you
have a gun you use for hunting or for self-defense in your home, I
don't want your gun.""

So.... all I have to tell you is that we have our guns for hunting or
self-defense and you'll stop posting this crap???? Or did I not pay
enough for my gun? Or maybe some bullet fell through a roof somewhere
and we're off and running again (that's a really bizarre story). Or?






A. I wouldn't trust anything Luntz produces. He is the reigning whore of
pollsters.

B. The last pistol I bought cost me more than a grand, which is no more
than a moderate price for a non-22LR competition semi-auto. Sure shoots
sweet, though. :)

In article ,
says...
Or did I not pay
enough for my gun? Or maybe some bullet fell through a roof somewhere
and we're off and running again (that's a really bizarre story). Or?

Yeah, the mythbusters did a whole thing on it. They found it to be a
myth but admitted they had interviewed doctors in the middle east who
say they have cases of falling bullets killing people.

I have to wonder how a bullet falling so slow could come through a roof
(becoming distorted) and then enter a head so far as to not be seen
until an autopsy. I would believe a ricochet from inside, or a direct
shot during a disturbance more. Something fishy there in my mind...