On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 08:37:24 -0400, Jimmy wrote:

On 10/6/2011 1:08 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:03:53 -0400, wrote:

On 10/6/2011 3:42 AM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 18:31:16 -0400, wrote:

On 10/5/2011 5:51 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

Hell yeah!

All it takes is to get disgruntled, go get your completely legal cache
of firearms and start shootin' at anything that moves or looks human!

Hey, he was perfectly normal until the safety meeting this morning.

Just think, if the government was not suppressing the peoples right to
keep and bear arms or carry concealed weapons somebody could have shot
they guy before he killed anyone.

We've already established that JPS would stand by and watch his wife and
daughter raped, rather than intervene.

He's scared of guns.

You're a stupid **** and you say stupid things that have no bearing in
reality.

Forgot that thread already, eh?

What man would sit and watch his wife and child harmed without doing
something? You think a gun is the only weapon a man has against
another man, which shows the weakness of your brain.

You did forget that thread.

It's like saying you'd watch your boat sink for lack of a bildge pump.

If a bilge pump could, my chance, fire a bullet, yea, you'd want them
outlawed.

****ing simpleton, you are.

At least I remember the threads I wrote, so I don't look like a fool.

Your disingenuous posturing doesn't hunt.

On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 19:19:32 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:37:29 -0700, jps wrote:



Guns are ****ing everywhere and in the hands of a population that
clearly cannot handle the responsibility.

Most of your post is a brainless rant, but the above is true. It
always WILL be true because some people don't value you or your life,
though they would gladly take what you have.

You're a simple soul. I guess you're incapable of understanding that
people's brains are mutable, including yours. Given the right
circumstances, I can guarantee that you could be convinced to kill
people who you thought were out to harm you, even tho' they weren't.

You're no different from any other human being that can be manipulated
into violence through vigilantism, retribution, jealousy.

You could be that guy in Cupertino with a clean record and a beef that
turns into mayhem. If you think you couldn't, you have not a ****ing
clue about human nature and the capability of the brain to manufacture
circumstance.

On 10/7/11 3:28 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 19:19:32 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:37:29 -0700, wrote:



Guns are ****ing everywhere and in the hands of a population that
clearly cannot handle the responsibility.

Most of your post is a brainless rant, but the above is true. It
always WILL be true because some people don't value you or your life,
though they would gladly take what you have.

You're a simple soul. I guess you're incapable of understanding that
people's brains are mutable, including yours. Given the right
circumstances, I can guarantee that you could be convinced to kill
people who you thought were out to harm you, even tho' they weren't.

You're no different from any other human being that can be manipulated
into violence through vigilantism, retribution, jealousy.

You could be that guy in Cupertino with a clean record and a beef that
turns into mayhem. If you think you couldn't, you have not a ****ing
clue about human nature and the capability of the brain to manufacture
circumstance.

We've got a paranoid guy right here in rec.boats who conjures up all
sorts of horrors and then acts on them or says he acts on them. He's
exactly the type that you hear about going out on a shooting spree.


--
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.

On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 19:19:32 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 08:13:25 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 19:12:22 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 13:28:05 -0700, jps wrote:



Have people just gone ****ing insane? The guy who brought out his
weapon was perfectly sane prior to bringing out his weapon and
shooting the **** out of 9 people.

Facts not in evidence. You have no proof that he was sane 5 seconds, 5
minutes, 5 hours or 5 days prior to him committing the crime.


You are missing the logical conclusion of JPS's words. If a person can
be perfectly sane one moment and a crazed murderer the next second, it
stands to reason that we should all carry weapons to protect ourselves
against everybody. Since we are all just a second away from insanity!

I learned to "Be Prepared" in the Boy Scouts. It still serves me and
mine well today.

You could be convinced to kill in the right circumstances, in short
order. Or you could convince yourself just like that guy in
Cupertino. No judge or jury necessary. And you might be right and
you might be wrong.

I'm not comfortable with you or anyone else having that option apart
from those specifically trained to interpret potentially dangerous
situations.

In article ,
says...

On 10/7/11 3:28 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 19:19:32 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:37:29 -0700, wrote:



Guns are ****ing everywhere and in the hands of a population that
clearly cannot handle the responsibility.

Most of your post is a brainless rant, but the above is true. It
always WILL be true because some people don't value you or your life,
though they would gladly take what you have.

You're a simple soul. I guess you're incapable of understanding that
people's brains are mutable, including yours. Given the right
circumstances, I can guarantee that you could be convinced to kill
people who you thought were out to harm you, even tho' they weren't.

You're no different from any other human being that can be manipulated
into violence through vigilantism, retribution, jealousy.

You could be that guy in Cupertino with a clean record and a beef that
turns into mayhem. If you think you couldn't, you have not a ****ing
clue about human nature and the capability of the brain to manufacture
circumstance.

We've got a paranoid guy right here in rec.boats who conjures up all
sorts of horrors and then acts on them or says he acts on them. He's
exactly the type that you hear about going out on a shooting spree.

How many guns do you own again, Harry Krause?

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 08:50:25 -0400, Jimmy wrote:

On 10/6/2011 2:48 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:07:45 -0400, wrote:

On 10/6/2011 11:07 AM, jps wrote:

Arming everybody in hopes of reducing violence is insane logic.

Who advocates arming "everyone"?

You made that up, didn't you, so you could look good by calling it
"insane logic"?!

Are you the only person fielding arguments in rec.boats?

I suggest you read some of Bertie Poop's fertile insights.

I know it's hard for you parse with comprehension because of your
anti-gun prejudice, but no one was advocating arming criminals.

The fact is that where citizens are armed, and it's known they are
armed, crimes against them are reduced, though not eliminated.

As has been demonstrated before, your agenda is not merely one of
reducing gun related deaths.

People with clean records aren't criminals until they are. Did this
guy in Cupertino ever have trouble with the law? Not from what I've
read. He just got fed up and snapped.

So you believe in prior restraint.

You, jps, could get drunk and drive a car, therefor, we are not going to
allow you to drive cars anymore.

Great logic.

Anyone with a brain knows that's possible for any human being, given
the right circumstances. And, in America, we're used to immediate
gratification.

Guns and immediate gratification do not mix well.

When are you going to outlaw penises?

For Americans not to recognize the folly in the wide distribution of
firearms is as stupid as not recognizing that Walmart-style globalism
spells the demise of our middle class.

It's past the time that people should have woken up but it's not
happening. Too bad for the USA.

The only thing between you and slavery is a gun.

On 10/7/2011 5:54 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...
It's past the time that people should have woken up but it's not
happening. Too bad for the USA.

The only thing between you and slavery is a gun.

And therein is the hidden agenda. It's not about the guns at all, it's
about control.

On 10/7/2011 3:30 PM, X ` Man wrote:


We've got a paranoid guy right here in rec.boats who conjures up all
sorts of horrors and then acts on them or says he acts on them. He's
exactly the type that you hear about going out on a shooting spree.



Yeah he is definitely a sick ****er. Threatening to shoot anybody that
comes around, calling out folks all day then daring them to come face
his gun, playing with a gun on the phone to try to impress someone. Yup,
that Mr. Dr. Karen Grear of Catholic University of America, is a
paranoid ****er, just dying to shoot somebody, anybody.. Hopefully when
he goes on his spree, the cops take him out fast...

On Oct 6, 10:07*am, jps wrote:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 08:22:13 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:









On 10/6/11 8:13 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 19:12:22 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 13:28:05 -0700, *wrote:

Do you carry your sidearm at work? *They were all at work in a quary.

Company policy prevents me from carrying a firearm at work. Since we
have a security force at work personal firearms are deemed not
necessary.

What? Your company doesn't think your safety is at the top of the list?
What would that security force do if a disgruntled worker got to your
floor, started shooting and killed 20 people before they could get to
him? Get body bags? And how would you be transporting that firearm in
Maryland? You know the rules here.

merican skull?

If someone was carrying a concealed weapon for their own protection they
could have taken out the guy before he got to 2, 3 or 4 or more peoples.

If, if, if, if. And you're assuming the guy with the firearm wouldn't be
the first one shot or would actually have the balls to shoot back or was
a good enough aim. If, if, if, if...

The guy who justifies carrying a weapon for self-defense is more
likely to use it in the commission of a crime, mistaken circumstances,
vigilante justice or domestic abuse.

Arming everybody in hopes of reducing violence is insane logic.

Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, I think we all
know how that is working out. Those who intend to do harm will always
find a way to get a gun. Restricting others from being able to protect
themselves is why Chicago has had to take another look at their strict
gun laws as they left innocent people too vulnerable. The old saying
that "guns don't kill people, people do" is true, the fork and spoon
didn't make oprah fat and the pen didn't misspell the word. It's
called being responsible for your actions.
Government needs respect the 2nd amendment and concentrate on learning
and following the constitution and bill of rights as they are sworn to
uphold when they take office. They are suppose to be working for us
not the other way around. Gun control is one of the last steps before
complete tyranny, check out history.

On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 06:02:21 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 6, 10:07*am, jps wrote:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 08:22:13 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:









On 10/6/11 8:13 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 19:12:22 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 13:28:05 -0700, *wrote:

Do you carry your sidearm at work? *They were all at work in a quary.

Company policy prevents me from carrying a firearm at work. Since we
have a security force at work personal firearms are deemed not
necessary.

What? Your company doesn't think your safety is at the top of the list?
What would that security force do if a disgruntled worker got to your
floor, started shooting and killed 20 people before they could get to
him? Get body bags? And how would you be transporting that firearm in
Maryland? You know the rules here.

merican skull?

If someone was carrying a concealed weapon for their own protection they
could have taken out the guy before he got to 2, 3 or 4 or more peoples.

If, if, if, if. And you're assuming the guy with the firearm wouldn't be
the first one shot or would actually have the balls to shoot back or was
a good enough aim. If, if, if, if...

The guy who justifies carrying a weapon for self-defense is more
likely to use it in the commission of a crime, mistaken circumstances,
vigilante justice or domestic abuse.

Arming everybody in hopes of reducing violence is insane logic.

Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, I think we all
know how that is working out. Those who intend to do harm will always
find a way to get a gun. Restricting others from being able to protect
themselves is why Chicago has had to take another look at their strict
gun laws as they left innocent people too vulnerable. The old saying
that "guns don't kill people, people do" is true, the fork and spoon
didn't make oprah fat and the pen didn't misspell the word. It's
called being responsible for your actions.
Government needs respect the 2nd amendment and concentrate on learning
and following the constitution and bill of rights as they are sworn to
uphold when they take office. They are suppose to be working for us
not the other way around. Gun control is one of the last steps before
complete tyranny, check out history.

Mexico is run by drug cartels who are armed, nearly exclusively, by
the USA.