'He Might Be Here to Rob Us': Pharmacist Guns Down Would-Be Robber

originally posted by: miomo
a reply to: Develo

The best part about you anti gunners is you are the same people who literally are so destitute you cant get to a DMV and pay $10 for a drivers licence, or pay for your own birth control, but youre gonna take my guns.

The human race is too damn ignorant which is displayed beautifully by your comment quoted above. The ironic thing is that I'm not anti-gun, and believe in the Second Amendment, but that's where it ends.

It's people like you that try to justify their personal fear and paranoia in carrying a concealed gun by making it an ignorant, borderline racist, political issue. What you do in effect by making such ignorant statements is create more enemies for yourself politically or morally or otherwise. The truth is that the reason most people don't own guns is because they can't afford them, or live in environments where the gun will become more of a danger than a safeguard.

Hey, I've got an idea! It's second amendment rights for all right?

THE EASIEST WAY TO "UNINTENTIONALLY" START THE NEXT CIVIL WAR: Heavily encourage all members of society despite race, color, political affiliation, or income to aggressively exercise their "God given right" to bear arms. (For self defense only!)

Pro-minority organizations (like NAACP) as well as the leftie liberal hawk groups (oh hell, throw in the entire Democratic Party) should go on funding drives to arm all of their political constituents for free. It's every American citizens right, right? It would be a service to all of the low life anti-gun people who are too poor to afford $10 renewed licenses or birth control prescriptions.

-->(Do you really think street people are all that poor? There's much more to that miserable life than not having $10 for a good reason. If you were unbiasedly exposed to that life daily and personally(ever) you'd understand how ignorant that sounded. Unfortunately you just sound like someone in a better living situation that hates people for their poor lifestyle and the usual political ideals that come with being poor.)

The Nazis were like that too. So are many Islamic Fundamentalists. That's where the right wing begins to blur, on the extreme side (just like the left). Please don't assist their ideals unintentionally through defensive paranoid ignorance of other people.

If poor people were assisted by some liberal group(s) with help receiving and registering firearms at little to no cost (as a service), and those who wanted would be enrolled in concealed carry permits at courses arranged at community centers in the cities at no charge, you'd all be killing each other in the streets and country-side before the end of the decade. But don't worry, it'd never happen because people like you would cry and start picket lines at your local court houses and government buildings complaining that many of those guns would be subverted to criminal elements of the minority population and used en masse to rob and kill people just like you. Because y'all are ... oh so scared. That's why you champion the guns and what you can do with them to protect yourself, family, businesses, and others. In the back of your minds, you think it is more of a likelihood that you'll ever need to use it to begin with. Because y'all are .. oh so scared.

The more extreme right-wing gun activists/owners though(which is the biggest and most vocal portion) would just love it if everyone were armed, legally at that. It would give them more of a reason to walk around with guns on them for everyone to see, which they love doing in places of business. There are extremely small chances of armed men coming into Food Lion to kill you, it's just absurd to try to act like that's the only or main reason you carry -- to protect others. You're just protecting yourselves and getting an ego high off of people being intimidated and afraid of you because you're walking around the grocery store with a gun holster like it's the wild west.

As soon as one stupid armed group gets too offended and shows up somewhere to assemble and ends up shooting someone or something, you guys would jump on the chance to start murdering "thugs" or anyone else you identify with the enemy in the street. You'd be defending yourselves and your way of life right? Just like the Civil War started. You could start drawing your border lines and fronts and start pulling some Ukrainian style separatist sh#t.

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Develo

originally posted by: Develo

originally posted by: HomerinNC
The purpose of my thread is to reaffirm the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, is valid, and will be until there are no more criminals that we need to defend ourselves from.
The purpose of my thread is to show the validity of the rights as a citizen of the United States of America the reason we need to keep and bear arms against the likes of the dirtbag in my OP, despite those people who say noone needs to have firearms.
Incidents like this prove my point that honest, hard working, law abiding citizens need to continue to defend themselves.
Until there is no more crime, the Second Amendment will be forever valid.

Do you believe someone in the US wants to disarm the population? Serious question.

And if yes, who?

I knew it. This is typically the only and main reason people use to refuse gun control, and yet when you ask them who wants to take their gun (like for real) they get all silent.

Like seriously, do you guys really believe there is some sort of conspiracy to massively disarm the US? For real? Who am I kidding, this is ATS, home of conspiracy theorists.

A very long list could be made available, I am quite sure.

It isn't that no one can provide that list, it would just take a while and I think that it wouldn't have an effect.

What a nice wat of ignoring the question.

It's OK, I don't need a list, just tell me a few out of'your mind.

Who do you think wants to completely disarm the US? Let me guess? The illuminati? The UN? The commies? The aliens? Obama?

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Develo

thehill.com...

In the USA, we have the liberal left who, as a group, would like to remove guns from society. (that's not to say that every liberal is anti-gun, but the majority seems to be)

How can you not see this agenda? Even with all that water in the way.

Gun control isn't gun ban.

I'm looking specifically for things supporting that wild claim "unggg they will come to take our guns! They don't want Americans to defend themselves!" that is often shouted around

a reply to: HomerinNC

What if he wasnt going to shoot the store clerk - YOU go ahead and risk that. Most robbers shoot their victims now to avoid being identified.

citation required

originally posted by: Develo

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Develo

originally posted by: Develo

originally posted by: HomerinNC
The purpose of my thread is to reaffirm the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, is valid, and will be until there are no more criminals that we need to defend ourselves from.
The purpose of my thread is to show the validity of the rights as a citizen of the United States of America the reason we need to keep and bear arms against the likes of the dirtbag in my OP, despite those people who say noone needs to have firearms.
Incidents like this prove my point that honest, hard working, law abiding citizens need to continue to defend themselves.
Until there is no more crime, the Second Amendment will be forever valid.

Do you believe someone in the US wants to disarm the population? Serious question.

And if yes, who?

I knew it. This is typically the only and main reason people use to refuse gun control, and yet when you ask them who wants to take their gun (like for real) they get all silent.

Like seriously, do you guys really believe there is some sort of conspiracy to massively disarm the US? For real? Who am I kidding, this is ATS, home of conspiracy theorists.

A very long list could be made available, I am quite sure.

It isn't that no one can provide that list, it would just take a while and I think that it wouldn't have an effect.

What a nice wat of ignoring the question.

It's OK, I don't need a list, just tell me a few out of'your mind.

Who do you think wants to completely disarm the US? Let me guess? The illuminati? The UN? The commies? The aliens? Obama?

The one that surprised me that I only just found out about is the Humane Society but, a very large proportion of left wing partisan funding goes directly into anti 2nd amendment activism. It isn't surprising or even suspicious as many non gun-related right wing non-profits fund pro 2nd amendment activism.

a reply to: greencmp

Again you have eluded the question. I'm not talking about gun control but about disarming the US. Are you seriously suggesting here the American left wing wants to disarm the US? Is it what you are claiming?

originally posted by: Develo
a reply to: greencmp

Again you have eluded the question. I'm not talking about gun control but about disarming the US. Are you seriously suggesting here the American left wing wants to disarm the US? Is it what you are claiming?

Anecdotally, I think this pretty much speaks for itself.

Would a 'gun control' advocate deploy their children with 'no gun' signs?

a reply to: r0xor

Its just like you little excuse machine liberals to try and spin from where all the fear and paranoia comes from. Its really inconceivable that someone believes the guys with guns who just want everyone to leave them the f alone are more fearful and paranoid than the little liberals who constantly cry about how dangerous those guns are. If you werent a liberal, id be shocked by the stupidity. And us alphas dont much care about making political enemies. I can handle myself. I can afford birth control. I'll be alright. And i know its established fact, but its hilarious your example cites the necessity for others to buy guns for the liberals bc theyre too poor and destitute to do it themselves, those are your people.



For good measure...

An individual’s likelihood of being a Democrat decreases with every additional dollar he or she earns. Democrats have a huge advantage (63 percent) with voters earning less than $15,000 per year.

www.debt.org...

originally posted by: Develo

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Develo

thehill.com...

In the USA, we have the liberal left who, as a group, would like to remove guns from society. (that's not to say that every liberal is anti-gun, but the majority seems to be)

How can you not see this agenda? Even with all that water in the way.

Gun control isn't gun ban.

I'm looking specifically for things supporting that wild claim "unggg they will come to take our guns! They don't want Americans to defend themselves!" that is often shouted around

The rights we enjoy in the USA with regards to firearms are vastly different than the UK and Australia wouldn't you agree?

Looking into how things have happened in the past, it's doesn't take a mensa member to fully grasp the agenda. Start out with a few restrictions. Some common sense laws. All that has been done. Then if the fruit is ripe, take a few more liberties. Now I realize that line of thinking is bordering on your "NWO" type of concept, but being the realist that I am, I chose to look at history and learn from it, rather than just hope for the best.

What is really sad is that the gun grabbers seem to have the opposite affect. When they make noise about taking things away, sales for "the things they are trying to take away" skyrocket and you get way more of the thing they wanted to remove. Like the recent flap about AR-15's from Sandy Hook. Now most gun owners either have or want an AR-15, and some for no other reason than they feared having them taken away.

If we had good enforcement of the laws that already exist, and focus on crime determent instead of trying to rid honest citizens of their weapons, the overall goal of less gun violence might become a reality.

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: Develo
a reply to: greencmp

Again you have eluded the question. I'm not talking about gun control but about disarming the US. Are you seriously suggesting here the American left wing wants to disarm the US? Is it what you are claiming?

Anecdotally, I think this pretty much speaks for itself.

Would a 'gun control' advocate deploy their children with 'no gun' signs?

So its children with signs who write laws.

Got it.

originally posted by: Develo
a reply to: greencmp

Again you have eluded the question. I'm not talking about gun control but about disarming the US. Are you seriously suggesting here the American left wing wants to disarm the US? Is it what you are claiming?

I think they want to discourage the arming of the opposing political parties constituents, not the entire country. There's a place for guns, I mean, our police having guns is a good thing despite the recent deaths. Way better system than certain European ones where the cops walk around with clubs, lol.

No one likes to be threatened by ignorant people with guns that are willing to use them. Also, no one likes making a political agreement or otherwise under duress due to the other party being armed.

Democrats, especially minority democrats, of which there are a majority, are genuinely afraid of being killed by extreme right-wingers and/or racists, it's a deep seeded fear from the 1900's. Back then they'd get lynched and murdered by mobs of angry, disenfranchised, armed white folks.. who vote right-wing.

Likewise, many Republicans or right-wingers are genuinely paranoid that the next trip they take to the inner portion of the city, that someone might rob or attempt to car jack them with a gun.

a reply to: Develo

I am surprised that was so easy.

a reply to: network dude

Sorry its only you who sees an agenda here. That you make the shortcut between gun control and gun grabbing only tells about your own fears, not about reality.

I find that the gun grabbers fall generally into two groups, both Democratic constituencies.

The first is a group that is already paying a hefty price from the illegal ownership and use of guns in their communities. They have already been largely prevented from legally owning their own means of self- defense and feel that the only way their lives get safer is no guns at all. They largely depend on the government for their food, shelter, and income, and really cannot fathom any improvement to their lives where the government is not involved. I can at least understand the situation that leads to their view.

The second group is less populous but more powerful and dangerous due to their wealth, fame, or education. ( Think Bloomberg Michael Moore and hollywood types). This group truly hates the idea that a bullet will kill them just like anyone else. All their money, fame, good looks, education, and political connections could conceivably be ended by someone with none of those benefits. It's just not fair in their mind that something could make them equal to the rest of humanity. They have no problems paying for others to provide their and their families security, but God forbid a working man in the country take out upon himself to be responsible for his own families safety. This group is at the top of the party that the first group is beholden to for their livelihood.

originally posted by: Develo
a reply to: greencmp

Again you have eluded the question. I'm not talking about gun control but about disarming the US. Are you seriously suggesting here the American left wing wants to disarm the US? Is it what you are claiming?

Can you look objectively at the anti-gun agenda and NOT see that fully disarmed citizens is the endgame? Otherwise, what would be their point? To have guns that only can kill 7 people before reload instead of 30?

This is so obvious, I wasn't even sure it was up for debate.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Develo
a reply to: greencmp

Again you have eluded the question. I'm not talking about gun control but about disarming the US. Are you seriously suggesting here the American left wing wants to disarm the US? Is it what you are claiming?

Can you look objectively at the anti-gun agenda and NOT see that fully disarmed citizens is the endgame? Otherwise, what would be their point? To have guns that only can kill 7 people before reload instead of 30?

This is so obvious, I wasn't even sure it was up for debate.

Yes?

Throughout the world there are gun control laws and armed civilians.

The endgame you claim is real seems to only exist in paranoid minds?

The children are terrified and do not want any more men walking into their schools with guns and trying or succeeding to kill them all execution style 1 by 1 at their desks like Columbine. Most people don't consider the usefulness of a gun until they reach adulthood and are surrounded by danger.

(Queue up the conspiracy theories that the school shootings were inside jobs by alphabet agencies to scare more people into being anti-gun..)

It has little to do with the children being 'taught' or 'put up to' anti-gun activism by their handlers, I mean parents.

originally posted by: Develo
a reply to: network dude

Sorry its only you who sees an agenda here. That you make the shortcut between gun control and gun grabbing only tells about your own fears, not about reality.

I have a sneaking suspicion that it's not just me who sees this.

a reply to: network dude

More than 5% of the population is paranoid.

a reply to: network dude

I always thought the main focus point was to stop Guns getting into the hands of the Mentally Ill.


I'm not suggesting the Mentally Ill can purchase a Gun legally...
Although I have heard that on the boards.


Is that a myth, or dependent on certain State's Laws?