Ok, nca225, I'll start with my own words which you have generously reproduced here. What part do you not understand? I'd like to see armed security guards in schools. Obama's kids enjoy the security of 11 armed guards, but he says it won't work with other schools. Obama himself enjoys 24 hr. a day Secret Service protection, but says Wayne Lapierre is wrong to suggest armed protection for our kids in school. So do many other Liberal Democrats like Mayor Bloomberg and George Soros. Dianne Feinstein has a concealed carry permit, and security guards in the Senate, and a security detail when she travels, but she too would deny schools the same solution that works for her, and at banks, airports, in airplane cockpits, at military and nuclear installations, and dozens of other places. The Liberals would rather deny kids that kind of protection because it would not dovetail with the plan to infringe upon the Bill of Rights.
Part two: I absolutely do believe that these same Liberal Gun grabbers exploit these mass shootings at schools and elsewhere, and they can't wait for the next one so they can immediatly call for more restrictions on law abiding gunowners. Previous anti-gun legislation did NOTHING to stop these shootings, and they don't care to consider any link between them and Anti-depressants, violent movies and videos, cultural changes including the breakdown of the family through Liberal Great Society policies or the removal from schools of any vestige of religion or morality. I do not fear my own tongue here. You and your Liberal ilk wish to restrict the Second Amendment in ways that will do nothing to prevent some future crazy from getting a gun or guns and killing a lot of people. And you all can't wait to trumpet the latest shooting spree in order to advance your agenda. Obama and Biden and Congressional Democrats aren't too very concerned about the hundreds of Mexicans who have been killed by guns that their administration illegally walked into the hands of drug cartels. It's obvious what the game here is. The game is hypocrisy and exploiting grief and raw emotions to advance the anti-gun agenda. Unfortunately, they're playing the game with the lives of innocents.
I know you think these are words I'd like to run away from... nothing could be further from the truth. I'm glad to have had the opportunity to repeat and explain them.
Now, where did you say that guns should be locked in safes and that if some crazy got access and misused them, the owner of the guns should be held accountable? Let's start with your post # 307338 which said that a family with a mentally ill member would have to keep their guns in a safe... but did not yet get to the level of requiring prosecution if the mentally ill person did get the guns.
Then let's go to your post #307419 in the same thread where you did support prosecution of someone who had their locked up guns stolen and used in a crime.
There was a subsequent post in another thread where you went even further, saying that anyone who had a gun that was not locked up should be held criminally liable for the actions of the person who stole the gun, but I haven't found it yet. Don't you recall how I questioned the effectiveness of that and asked if Adam Lanza couldn't have held a knife to his Mother's neck to force her to open it... or just kill her and take all the time he needed to break in? Or just steal a neighbors' guns instead? I did run across a couple more places where you touted laws requiring guns to be locked up, and then places where you say the ONLY thing you want is a ban on hi-cap magazines... up to and including a requirement to turn in existing magazines with prosecution for non-compliance. Frankly, I'm getting bored with going back and referencing things you said only a week or two earlier but can't remember. Maybe you took my advice to delete it before you accused me of making up stuff about you again. I've proven you wrong enough times that anyone who reads Misfires can tell us who has credibility in these matters. It sure ain't you.
I'm not sure why I wasted my time anyway because you are frequently in complete denial about things you said. You went nuts the other night when I reproduced a quote you made verbatim, and you had made the same quote with an added comma and capitalized letters changing the meaning somewhat. But I hadn't even referenced that quote in any form in my original question to you. That's what was so bizarre about the whole exchange. Remember when you said to me "No F-U your not done you illiterate f#@k. You just quoted exactly what I had said, but apparently dont understand what OR means."? That's just how you phrased it complete with all of the misspellings and punctuation errors. But the original quote I gave you was different than what you provided, and had different content and meaning. You changed it and got mad at me for giving it back to you as you originally posted it. Exactly! There is something seriously wrong with you, and you need help. You accuse me of misrepresenting what you wrote when it is you who misrepresent yourself. And again, the quote you got so hung up on had little to do with my original question from my previous post. Can't you get the voices in your head to agree or comprehend?
Don't you wish we could be back in Misfires where you could make a fool of yourself to a smaller audience?
