It's not me who is posturing like they have a direct line into the minds of people who have been dead for over 200 years.
Armed Citizen Stops Shooter at Indiana Mall: GOOD GUY WITH A GUN
- Thread starter Grokmaster
- Start date
It's not me who is posturing like they have a direct line into the minds of people who have been dead for over 200 years.
A bad guy with a gun lawyered up. What does that tell you?
Yes, exactly.
Why is any legal contract amended? Because it needs fixing. That's what amendments are, dude. Fixes.
The Constitution didn't explicitly grant rights to everybody when it was first written, which is why they added amendment after amendment to it. Why do you think that happened 27 times? Because the Constitution either didn't talk about it, or was too vague and ambiguous and needed to be clarified. In fact, that's the whole story behind the 14th-16th amendments. Which you would know...if you ever received any education on this. Which you haven't.
You gave yourself authority that you didn't earn and *I'm* the one not to be taken seriously?
ExpressLane
Verified User
We need more people like him.
ExpressLane
Verified User
Indeed.
All within 15 seconds I might add. 10 shots 8 hits on the now dead asshole. Reinforced my eariler decision to switch to a P365 from my 340PD.
snip/
Chief Ison said that the gunman entered the mall through the food court entrance at 4:54 p.m. He walked directly to the food court restroom. He exited the restroom 1 hour and 2 minutes later.
He shot and killed victim Gomez outside the restroom. He pointed his rifle into the food court, where the married victims were eating dinner, and shot them to death. He then shot more rounds into the food court, striking a 22 year old female, who is recovering from a leg wound at the hospital, the chief said. A bullet fragment ricocheted off the wall, striking a 12-year-old female running away. A minor wound was treated at the hospital, where a small piece of metal jacket was removed.
The shooter was then stopped by the Good Samaritan at 5:57 p.m. He was armed with a pistol and engaged the shooter as Sapirman stood outside the restroom area firing into the food court, Ison said.
Dicken fired several times, hitting Sapirman, who tried to retreat back into the restroom but fell to the ground after being shot, said Ison. Police recovered 24 rifle rounds fired by the suspect and 10 handgun rounds fired by Dicken.
As I sit here, I'm sure the media can't wait to interview such a hero. Pffft.....
Who am I kidding, they are digging through his social media and trash bin to find out he's a racist
bigot, homophobe and Trump supporter. Fuck the media.
Last edited:
Great shooting and administering the TRS "Taxpayer Relief Shot"
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you're a fucking moron for even believing that stupid shit. go sit down until you become an adult.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
exactly, YOU cannot be taken seriuosly. your views are ass backwards, make zero sense, and are not a part of the real fucking world.
Oh so you DO support Medicare for All, then?
So why have you been opposing it this whole time?
LMAO!
So you bleat and wonder why no one bothered to take the mass shooter to a shrink and get him the mental health he needed (if we are to believe you that the mass shooter was mentally ill which there is no indication of), yet that infrastructure doesn't exist because we don't have universal, single-payer health care.
So instead of supporting that, you oppose it purely for the purpose of whining about it here.
Most of the things you complain about here Dutch, are things you are standing in the way of solving either through your BoTHSidErism, or your carelessness when it comes to voting. Because no one here believes for a second that you know anything about any of the candidates you reflexively voted for. Because if you did, you would be embarrassed for saying you voted 3P...because the 3P you voted for was a joke.
If you think mental illness is the cause of mass shooting, why don't you support M4A which would get everyone equal access to mental health services? I think it's because you want to be a perpetual bitch.
OK...which one of us wants to limit who votes, you or me? You, because you said so on this thread.
Right, but you're the one who doesn't want certain people to vote.
See, and all you can respond with to my well thought out posts is this hysterical screeching about how you and only you have the authority to know what a bunch of dead people were thinking.
I think your lack of education makes you feel so insecure that you compensate by being an arrogant tool.
You may have "read things", but you didn't understand what you were reading because you were never given those tools, or they never developed because there was never a chance for them to do so.
No one inherently has the ability to think critically, those are skills you learn. And the military drives that shit OUT OF YOU. The military doesn't want you to think critically about anything...they want an obedient person who will follow order unquestioning.
So if anything, your critical thinking skills have been diminished since first picking up those tools in adolescence by your service in the military.
Last edited:
OK, so you're admitting now that you just gave yourself that authority, no one gave it to you.
So what did you do to earn the authority to know what the FF were thinking?
Did you get a degree?
Did you write a thesis paper?
Were you ever tested on this?
What makes you think you have the authority to know exactly what the FF were thinking?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
I'm a realist who understands the benefits of a healthy, educated workforce and military. Your "all or nothing" view of the world is immature and unrealistic.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
If you want to start depriving Americans of their unalienable rights, then let's do it right. Not just the half-assed LW looney version.
LMAO! So you don't support M4A, then?
I'm confused here, Dutch, because it sounds to me like you want to have the benefits of M4A without supporting the policy, wouldn't that be immature?
I have always maintained that voter participation should be at least 90%, if not mandatory, so I don't know what you're trying to do here but the message you are sending out to the board is that you don't think everyone should have the right to vote.
I've never said that or anything close to that, but you have.
So in this competition of who is more authoritarian, it seems that you are far ahead of me.