See what Gun Controller California and a lying California attorney, Gun Controller Steven T. Schoonover, and flip flopper James K. Olson did here to a Nevada citizen?s right to have a gun to protect herself after James K. Olson had broken into this Nevada citizen?s home! Gun Controllers Among Us, Marin County California Courts
Most liberal Gun Controller Marin County California has repeatedly thumbed their nose at the US Constitution, then imposed their illegal Gun Controller actions onto a Nevada citizen. What's next?
Lying California attorney, Steven T. Schoonover had the Nevada citizen served at 7:30 Thursday evening in Nevada for a 9 am the following Monday court in California and the California incompetent Gun Controller judge allowed that 1 day notice although illegal as have to be served more than 10 days before a hearing and furthermore it was to a Nevada citizen!
Three strikes you?re out lying California attorney, Gun Controller Steven T. Schoonover
You have some very strong opinions in your post. Where are your facts. DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT A FIREARM HAS NEVER BEEN USED TO DEFEND A PRIVATE CITIZEN FROM A CRIMINAL ACT? That all firearm owners want to kill someone or something.
What do you base these statements on?
Are any of these things an unreasonable response to a possible hazard?
Crime does happen.
Inocent people are killed during criminal acts.
Is so hard to grasp that some responsible, rational, reasonable citizen choose to provide another level of protection for themselves and thier family?
I am not a criminal, I am not mentally unstable and I have never killed anything with a firearm. Unless you think that paper targets are alive.
I hope I never have a house fire or really need my seat belt or have someone try to take my life. But if I it does happen I am prepared. I do this because I am not afraid. I am prepared.
you'd like to kill me because I want to take away your gun, so you want to kill me. Posted by at 7:51 AM \
If you or anyone else broke into my house and attempted to steal my property, yes, there will be serious problems. Posted by gunownerdan at 7:55 AM :
gunownerdan......not that you need to be urged to post again, but you sidestepped the question. No one said they were breaking into your home. you want to kill people who are for gun control, is that correct? if so, you are one incredibly simple minded idiot.
Not only are you pissed, but you are STUPID!!!!!! none of the "Rights" you claim to have are rights they are privileges. Kinda like your "Right" to be a sanctimonious, arrogant self-righteous ASS.
Before you make any further posts I suggest you get a dictionary, then find someone who is at least semi literate to help you with the big words, and learn to give the words you use their common meaning.
I do not know why I persist in entering into discussions with people who do not think, but rather persist in supporting their position with emotion or the world as they would like for it to be, but here we go again. I'm not sure which to start with: Dan is crazy because he fears the police or the words of the Second Amendment are out dated.
Perhaps we can combine the two arguments. The only reason we have a Bil of Rights is because the founding Fathers and the people they represented feared the government. Its true that at the time the Second Amendment was drafted bloodletting and witch burning were common place, but so too were writs of retainer and warrant less searches, along with interrogation tactics the left would classify as torture techniques, and people were still hung and even drawn and quartered upon conviction of certian crimes.
But since we live in a kinder, gentler, more civilized world none of those thing could ever happen; thus we no longer need the 4th, 5th or 8th Amendments because neither the police or any government agency would ever do anything wrong of violate any individuals basic human rights. And we certainly don't need the 1st Amendment either because everyone knows we no longer imprison people for speaking against the sovereign. So lets be reasonable and abolish the entire Bill of Rights... its all obsolete. And as far as fearing the Police and military of course we have no reason to fear them; Rodney King was all Hollywood Special Effects, Ruby Ridge was a hoax, Waco never happened.
Turning to the assertion that maybe if we had stricter gun control, Dan would not have needed to protect his himself, because the criminals would not have had access to weapons, thus they would not have attempted the crime. Let me think about that for say 3 1/2 seconds. There is absolutely no empirical evidence to support that proposition. However we do know that Washington D.C had the strictest gun control in the country (until it was ruled unconstitutional) yet at the same time they had one of the highest, if not the highest violent crime rate in the country. But on the other hand in every single political subdivision in the country that has relaxed its gun control laws the violent crime rate has gone done. Imagine that!!! So is it possible that stricter gun control might reduce crime somewhere??? Yes. But it is also possible that I might win the mega millions lottery and become an instant multi-millionaire.
Ya know, omega39-2009, blood-letting still would work some of the time and witch burning is still a good idea. Are you a witch ? ******************************************* Dan, around the time those quotes were made, blood letting and witch burning seemed like a good idea too.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Most liberal Gun Controller Marin County California has repeatedly thumbed their nose at the US Constitution, then imposed their illegal Gun Controller actions onto a Nevada citizen. What's next?
Lying California attorney, Steven T. Schoonover had the Nevada citizen served at 7:30 Thursday evening in Nevada for a 9 am the following Monday court in California and the California incompetent Gun Controller judge allowed that 1 day notice although illegal as have to be served more than 10 days before a hearing and furthermore it was to a Nevada citizen!
Three strikes you?re out lying California attorney, Gun Controller Steven T. Schoonover
http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3749
http://www.babelation.com/?q=node/1833
http://reno.broowaha.com/article.php?id=3630
What do you base these statements on?
Do you keep a fire extinguisher in your house?
Do you wear your seat belt?
Do you lock your doors at night?
Are any of these things an unreasonable response to a possible hazard?
Crime does happen.
Inocent people are killed during criminal acts.
Is so hard to grasp that some responsible, rational, reasonable citizen choose to provide another level of protection for themselves and thier family?
I am not a criminal, I am not mentally unstable and I have never killed anything with a firearm. Unless you think that paper targets are alive.
I hope I never have a house fire or really need my seat belt
or have someone try to take my life. But if I it does happen I am prepared. I do this because I am not afraid. I am prepared.
Posted by at 7:51 AM \
If you or anyone else broke into my house and attempted to steal my property, yes, there will be serious problems.
Posted by gunownerdan at 7:55 AM :
gunownerdan......not that you need to be urged to post again, but you sidestepped the question. No one said they were breaking into your home. you want to kill people who are for gun control, is that correct? if so, you are one incredibly simple minded idiot.
Thanxz for the intelligent response.
TJ
Not only are you pissed, but you are STUPID!!!!!! none of the "Rights" you claim to have are rights they are privileges. Kinda like your "Right" to be a sanctimonious, arrogant self-righteous ASS.
Before you make any further posts I suggest you get a dictionary, then find someone who is at least semi literate to help you with the big words, and learn to give the words you use their common meaning.
I'm not sure which to start with: Dan is crazy because he fears the police or the words of the Second Amendment are out dated.
Perhaps we can combine the two arguments. The only reason we have a Bil of Rights is because the founding Fathers and the people they represented feared the government.
Its true that at the time the Second Amendment was drafted bloodletting and witch burning were common place, but so too were writs of retainer and warrant less searches, along with interrogation tactics the left would classify as torture techniques, and people were still hung and even drawn and quartered upon conviction of certian crimes.
But since we live in a kinder, gentler, more civilized world none of those thing could ever happen; thus we no longer need the 4th, 5th or 8th Amendments because neither the police or any government agency would ever do anything wrong of violate any individuals basic human rights. And we certainly don't need the 1st Amendment either because everyone knows we no longer imprison people for speaking against the sovereign.
So lets be reasonable and abolish the entire Bill of Rights... its all obsolete.
And as far as fearing the Police and military of course we have no reason to fear them; Rodney King was all Hollywood Special Effects, Ruby Ridge was a hoax, Waco never happened.
Turning to the assertion that maybe if we had stricter gun control, Dan would not have needed to protect his himself, because the criminals would not have had access to weapons, thus they would not have attempted the crime.
Let me think about that for say 3 1/2 seconds. There is absolutely no empirical evidence to support that proposition. However we do know that Washington D.C had the strictest gun control in the country (until it was ruled unconstitutional) yet at the same time they had one of the highest, if not the highest violent crime rate in the country. But on the other hand in every single political subdivision in the country that has relaxed its gun control laws the violent crime rate has gone done. Imagine that!!!
So is it possible that stricter gun control might reduce crime somewhere??? Yes. But it is also possible that I might win the mega millions lottery and become an instant multi-millionaire.
Are you a witch ?
*******************************************
Dan, around the time those quotes were made, blood letting and witch burning seemed like a good idea too.
How seriously ignorant can you get?
Posted by gunownerdan
I'm saying that some of the ideas of the 17th and 18 century weren't all that great.
Posted by omega39-2009
Are you saying the Bill Of Rights is outdated?
How seriously ignorant can you get?