Why do libs keep asking why gun owners didn't stop Holmes? don't they know the theater had a gun ban?

by **camdin90** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:56 pm

that law abiding citizens followed, but was ignored by the criminal?

by **sayre** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:01 pm

yeah ive seen them say that too. usually in response to some con asking why the cops didn't stop him since we are supposed to rely on cops, and not ourselves to keep us safe.

by **jocheved** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:06 pm

yeah ive seen them say that too. usually in response to some con asking why the cops didn't stop him since we are supposed to rely on cops, and not ourselves to keep us safe.

As much as I disagree with Frank, I happen to think that he's right on point. A fire fight in a crowded movie theater is not an ideal situation even if the weapon is in the hands of a well trained person.

by **brenn15** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:07 pm

When will Libs learn that "Gun Free Zone" = "Free Fire Zone?"

It's no accident that when a mass shooting happens, it's almost always someplace that carrying a gun is prohibited.

by **bernd** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:13 pm

Stop lying. We're not asking that. We're glad that someone didn't turn this into a shootout, which would have killed more people.

by **bret11** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:20 pm

seriously it has been the right wingnuts saying that ...IF MORE PEOPLE IN THERE HAD GUNS THEY COULD HAVE STOPPED THE SHOOTER SOONER.....REALLY!!!! in a theater.....what kind IDIOT says that?....oh, I know, TEA BAGGIN' JERKS.....

by **aldric13** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:24 pm

We aren't asking that

by **josephus** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:25 pm

Realisticly though... There had to be atleast one...

by **westbroc90** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:37 pm

WWAT? WIYP?

Advertisments:

Useful Links: