Responsible gun owner protects personal property

[Dugout DickStone]

tragically unsurprising

[EMAWican]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/28/texas-mother-who-killed-daughters-called-family-meeting-to-star-rampage-police-say.html

Chalk it up to mental illness

[Emo EMAW]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/28/armed-men-stop-walmart-parking-lot-fight-described-as-western-shootout.html?intcmp=hphz22   

[bucket]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/28/armed-men-stop-walmart-parking-lot-fight-described-as-western-shootout.html?intcmp=hphz22   

Civilian police is not something that I want in this country.

[catastrophe]

The idea of law-abiding gun-toting citizens eager to jump in and right all the wrongs in the world scares me way more than just about any type of criminal.

[8manpick]

It would be delightfully ironic to hear renocat offer a defense of this gun-toting sock guy

Because renocat IS a gun-toting sock omg

[Emo EMAW]

The idea of law-abiding gun-toting citizens eager to jump in and right all the wrongs in the world scares me way more than just about any type of criminal.

Irrational fear is unfortunately pretty common. 

[SdK]

The idea of law-abiding gun-toting citizens eager to jump in and right all the wrongs in the world scares me way more than just about any type of criminal.

Irrational fear is unfortunately pretty common.

For both sides of the debate. Zing!

[Dugout DickStone]

At least he didn't shoot himself in leg/foot

[catastrophe]

The idea of law-abiding gun-toting citizens eager to jump in and right all the wrongs in the world scares me way more than just about any type of criminal.

Irrational fear is unfortunately pretty common.

For both sides of the debate. Zing!

Yea. That's exactly what concerns me. Irrationally afraid/paranoid people with guns.

[star seed 7]

Heading into law this Friday is Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1736, which will put into action something gun owners have been encouraging for years.
As of July 1, if a handgun carry permit holder in Tennessee is injured, suffers bodily injury or death, incurs economic loss or expense, property damage or any other compensable loss on a property posted as a gun-free zone, they can sue the person or entity who stripped them of their right to self defense.
SWEET!
In layman’s terms, any permit holder injured as a result of being stripped of their right to self defense, and their handgun, in a posted gun-free zone can file a lawsuit within two years of the event as long as they meet the following requirements:
were authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident
prohibited from carrying a firearm due to the posting of a gun-free sign
the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law and posted by choice
Can you imagine? Holding gun-free zone property accountable for injuries people sustained by being disarmed and left defenseless? Groundbreaking.

Holy crap, gun nuts are losing their minds over this

[catastrophe]

That makes no sense.  What if the only reason the person was only injured on the property instead of killed was because the perpetrator did not bring a gun into the gun free zone?

[Emo EMAW]

That makes no sense.  What if the only reason the person was only injured on the property instead of killed was because the perpetrator did not bring a gun into the gun free zone?

You mean like they were beaten with a baseball bat instead of shot because criminals abide the signs too?

[Mrs. Gooch]

Heading into law this Friday is Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1736, which will put into action something gun owners have been encouraging for years.
As of July 1, if a handgun carry permit holder in Tennessee is injured, suffers bodily injury or death, incurs economic loss or expense, property damage or any other compensable loss on a property posted as a gun-free zone, they can sue the person or entity who stripped them of their right to self defense.
SWEET!
In layman’s terms, any permit holder injured as a result of being stripped of their right to self defense, and their handgun, in a posted gun-free zone can file a lawsuit within two years of the event as long as they meet the following requirements:
were authorized to carry a gun at the time of the incident
prohibited from carrying a firearm due to the posting of a gun-free sign
the property owner was not required to be posted by state or federal law and posted by choice
Can you imagine? Holding gun-free zone property accountable for injuries people sustained by being disarmed and left defenseless? Groundbreaking.

Holy crap, gun nuts are losing their minds over this

Wait, is that real?

[ChiComCat]

That makes no sense.  What if the only reason the person was only injured on the property instead of killed was because the perpetrator did not bring a gun into the gun free zone?

You mean like they were beaten with a baseball bat instead of shot because criminals abide the signs too?

Or situations like this that have actually happened in real life

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/05/03/marine-killed-trying-intervene-domestic-dispute-texas-walgreens

[Mrs. Gooch]

That makes no sense.  What if the only reason the person was only injured on the property instead of killed was because the perpetrator did not bring a gun into the gun free zone?

You mean like they were beaten with a baseball bat instead of shot because criminals abide the signs too?

Or situations like this that have actually happened in real life

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/05/03/marine-killed-trying-intervene-domestic-dispute-texas-walgreens

The guy who was killed had a gun, so I don't think a No Guns sign got him killed.

[sonofdaxjones]

Don't worry fellers, rest comfortably knowing tens of thousands of sparkling new AK's are on the black market and in the hands of really bad people courtesy of the Obama administration.

So while the anti-gunners conjure up every excuse and reason to take away guns from law abiding U.S. citizens, the Obama administration is ensuring Islamic terrorists have the best made AK's the CIA can get their hands on . . . Before they're "stolen" of course.

[ChiComCat]

That makes no sense.  What if the only reason the person was only injured on the property instead of killed was because the perpetrator did not bring a gun into the gun free zone?

You mean like they were beaten with a baseball bat instead of shot because criminals abide the signs too?

Or situations like this that have actually happened in real life

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/05/03/marine-killed-trying-intervene-domestic-dispute-texas-walgreens

The guy who was killed had a gun, so I don't think a No Guns sign got him killed.

Hmmm, maybe having a gun at all times doesn't put you at more risk and this law is stupid

[catastrophe]

I'm thinking the majority of gun violence is not really premeditated (excluding suicide), so it's dumb to assume that everyone who ends up shooting another person would have disregarded all other laws leading up to that point.

[SkinnyBenny]

Dax, man, you are very very angry. Like, all the time. What politician do you even like? Or do you just get off on being pissed off all the time?

[Emo EMAW]

I'm thinking the majority of gun violence is not really premeditated (excluding suicide), so it's dumb to assume that everyone who ends up shooting another person would have disregarded all other laws leading up to that point.

Then why do we preclude felons from possessing firearms? 

[star seed 7]

Why do we not allow pedophiles to teach kindergarten?

[Emo EMAW]

I think it's because sometimes people know they are going to commit a crime before they commit a crime.  Just a thought tho.  You retards should think it out and put forth an even dumber argument if possible.

[catastrophe]

I'm thinking the majority of gun violence is not really premeditated (excluding suicide), so it's dumb to assume that everyone who ends up shooting another person would have disregarded all other laws leading up to that point.

Then why do we preclude felons from possessing firearms?

For pretty much the same reason. In both instances you are starting from the assumption that the person will follow the rules so that they don't end up in a heat of the moment situation later with a gun in their hand.

[sonofdaxjones]

Dax, man, you are very very angry. Like, all the time. What politician do you even like? Or do you just get off on being pissed off all the time?

Quite the opposite actually.  I guess you just don't see the stupidity and hypocrisy of an administration that on one hand is the worlds largest arms dealer, yet wants to prevent (and some in the administration want to confiscate) law abiding U.S. Citizens from buying guns. 

But, you're good at taking pictures of stadiums but a little dull when it come to politics.  Sorry to have let you on the truth SB, but chin up.