Trucker Murdered

Would you please retract your statement about scrutinizing partisan opinions? You just admitted that the only opinion that matters is your own.

Should I link the definition of "scrutinize" for you?

Or maybe partisan.

 

Winchester and Colt didn't end the Wild West. It was the courts and the enforcement of 'law and order' by various pseudo-governmental entities. While gun control regulations may not have prevented the 'OK corral shootout', it did prevent Earp etc from being held liable for the murders they committed bringing 'law and order'. And let's make no nonsense about it - the OK Corral shootout was over the enforceablity of Tombstone being a 'gun free zone', which was/is of questionable legality but ultimately worked. After about 1880 (I will happily concede the date with evidence) it became standard practice to allow law enforcement to violently accost any one carrying a firearm within town limits.

 

I'm sorry, I tried to avoid this thread but @gentleroger sucked me back in.....

One day you might need someone like me, but I'll never need someone like you. That's a promise. I've had my fill of this and I pray your life is full and successful without having to defend yourself. I won't be replying further.

 

I'm happy to change my opinions when presented with evidence that contradicts them, hence why I asked for scientific evidence supporting the view point that most mass shootings occur in gun free zones. But you'll notice at no point have I said that only 10% of mass shootings occur in 'gun free zones'. I have no idea what defines a 'gun free zone', let alone how many mass shootings occur within them.

For years I've been engaged in a low key battle with the Safety Critters about wearing a hi-viz vest. I wear one whenever it makes sense - while I'm watching a trainee do XXX, when I'm walking around after dark, etc. I don't make a point of wearing one when walking into the building at my home OC. I've repeatedly pointed out the company policy switched overnight from "hi-viz is non reimburseable" to "mandatory" due to a consent decree that prevented the company from having to make a 3 foot gap inbetween trailers at all of our drop lots. Since the switch in policy there has been ZERO reduction in injuries due to drivers wearing hi-viz. If you can show me that gun free zones make mass shootings more likely - do so.

 

Dude, I was in the dispatch office in Laredo. Some angry f tard came at me and was like, "WHERE'S YOUR SAFETY VEST!!!!"
I was like, "dude, I'm in an office."
He was like, "IT DOESN'T MATTER! YOU MUST HAVE IT ON AT ALL TIMES WHEN YOU'RE ON THE PROPERTY!!"
I was like, "ok, so where's yours?"

He just walked away like he was mad or something.
LOL

 

So, I've followed this all the way to this point. Six pages worth. Not much about the murdered trucker after about the second page.
My take on gun free zones? If you want to be in a gun free zone, you go right on in. None of my business. Just don't expect to see me there.
In my adult life, the places I've felt safest were places where every single swinging richard had at least two weapons on them at all times. We had another name for "gun free zone", It was called a "free fire zone".
Myself, I don't leave my house without a loaded .45 on my hip. It doesn't come off until it goes back into the gun safe at my bedside. I don't open carry, I don't flaunt it it by word or deed. It's a tool with a specific purpose. Just like the other things I don't walk about without. Watch, wallet, pocket knife, keys, etc.
I haven't had to exchange gunfire in decades and I hope I never have to again. I can't speak for anyone else, but getting shot really, really pizzed me off. I'm still here. I wouldn't be had I been unarmed no matter how angry I was at that time.

 

So do you not understand or refuse to acknowledge the difference between murder and justified use of deadly force?

 

Your last two sentences are a false dichotomy. It's not that one was right and the other was not; both were in the right although it seems that Wayland Academy was out of line for calling 911 when there was apparently no violation of law committed.

Nobody, because we don't punish intentions in the American legal system. But if someone had committed an unlawful act or omission then they would be subject to arrest and/or civil suit.

They can, and do, camouflage themselves when not everyone is carrying; most would-be shooters don't go to places where most people will be armed. Of course, your statement speaks to the toxic mindset of "everyone with a firearm is a threat."

Or they can respect the Second Amendment and Fourth Amendments by leaving people who aren't committing any criminal act alone while "monitoring the situation" and responding if someone attempts to commit a criminal act.

 

Well said...