DOH! Well that pretty much wraps it up for me. If all my firearms hadn't been lost in that canoe accident, by golly I'd be headed to Rancho Cucamonga to have 'em all made in to rebar.
1 posted on
07/15/2015 9:40:06 AM PDT by
rktman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-46 next last
To: rktman
2 posted on
07/15/2015 9:42:12 AM PDT by
Sans-Culotte
(Psalm 14:1 ~ The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”)
To: rktman
Looks like law enforcement can give up their guns since they’re so useless!!!
3 posted on
07/15/2015 9:42:53 AM PDT by
MeganC
(The Republic of The United States of America: 7/4/1776 to 6/26/2015 R.I.P.)
To: rktman
4 posted on
07/15/2015 9:43:06 AM PDT by
MeshugeMikey
("Never, Never, Never, Give Up," Winston Churchill ><>)
To: rktman
Paris Ainsworth was shot 4 times and still returned fire hitting 2 of 3 attackers, one of them twice.
5 posted on
07/15/2015 9:43:13 AM PDT by
cripplecreek
(Sad fact, most people just want a candidate to tell them what they want to hear)
To: rktman
You too, huh? The same thing happened to me.
6 posted on
07/15/2015 9:43:28 AM PDT by
Fiddlstix
(Warning! This Is A Subliminal Tagline! Read it at your own risk!(Presented by TagLines R US))
To: rktman
There are so many would-have-been victims of violent criminals, who were stopped by a citizen exercising his Second Amendment right, who would beg to disagree. We haven’t touched the ocean of such stories (verified) just in the many which have repeated on Free Republic.
7 posted on
07/15/2015 9:44:31 AM PDT by
mrsmel
(I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
To: rktman
Well, now we know.
So, I don’t see why cops should not be disarmed immediately, since:
1) It gets hundreds of thousands of guns off the street - TODAY, and
2) Since it is now known that, statistically speaking, guns don’t help them in a gunfight.
9 posted on
07/15/2015 9:44:45 AM PDT by
Darteaus94025
(Can't have a Liberal without a Lie)
To: rktman
Any mention of the margin of error in this study? (I’m not reading it.)
12 posted on
07/15/2015 9:47:08 AM PDT by
WinMod70
To: rktman
As is said in the medical research field— “a statistical outcome of less than 1% is STILL 100% to any one individual so affected by a “side effect”.”
This “study” ignores the 100% result of efficacy in the successful conduct of self defence with a firearm— which kills or stops the attacker.
I0W the article is total utter BS.
14 posted on
07/15/2015 9:47:34 AM PDT by
John S Mosby
(Sic Semper Tyrannis)
To: rktman
Point a gun at the researcher and say “rob me”.
Does this fool get a grant?
“Give me your damn money.”
15 posted on
07/15/2015 9:47:58 AM PDT by
GoneSalt
To: rktman
It may or may not be true for the collective overall. But the problem is that self defense is a VERY personal moment.
No matter what the masses may or may not be capable of, it all comes down to one person, standing alone in a hotel room, as a crack addled invader decides to shoot you,,,,
Is that individual supposed to forgo the tool he or she is skilled with, and that could save HIS and his wifes life? Is he supposed to forgo that because its better for the collective?
Defense of your life is not something to be judged in the collective, it is a collection of very lonely moments. One unique individual with a face and a name, and a right to try to save their own life.
It has always been, and will always be.
16 posted on
07/15/2015 9:48:02 AM PDT by
DesertRhino
(I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office)
To: rktman
The Justice Department, to which this group is attached, is 100% believable, and has never cut corners or fudged data. Eric Holder is a man of impeccable virtue! Never has been censured by Congress! Never has been caught shipping guns to Mexico! Never has refused any information when requested by Congress.
You should only bring this report to a gunfight.
17 posted on
07/15/2015 9:48:24 AM PDT by
Lazamataz
(Back in the 1970's, Iran used to call us the "Great Satan". Turns out they were right all along.)
To: rktman
Study Finds No Advantages to Using a Firearm in Self-Defense SituationsThen why do FBI and ATF agents carry a gun to defend themselves when making arrests?
23 posted on
07/15/2015 9:50:21 AM PDT by
GregoTX
(Remember the Alamo)
To: rktman
I guess the Secret Service agents assigned to Obama will be packing feather boas from now on.
24 posted on
07/15/2015 9:50:32 AM PDT by
Arm_Bears
(Biology is biology. Everything else is imagination.)
To: rktman
None of the people I know who have used guns for self-defense have ever reported the incident to the government, so I doubt their statistics are accurate.
And, of course, their argument is irrelevant to any 2nd Amendment argument, since the 2nd Amendment isn't about self-defense from individuals.
To: rktman
I tried to read the article all the way through just to say I did but couldn’t make it. The whole premise is so stupid and the numbers so manipulated its ridiculous.
Well I need to go clean my gun. :=)
28 posted on
07/15/2015 9:50:43 AM PDT by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
To: rktman
So the Secret Service, Capitol Police, FBI, State Police, celebrity bodyguards and FEMA have just traded in their weapons for running shoes?
30 posted on
07/15/2015 9:51:10 AM PDT by
2ndDivisionVet
(You can help: https://donate.tedcruz.org/c/FBTX0095/)
To: rktman
The two “punks” with a piece of pipe that confronted my wife and I certainly thought my .45 was an advantage.
32 posted on
07/15/2015 9:53:08 AM PDT by
Hornet22
To: rktman
New Study?
New Propaganda....
To: rktman
The authors.....
Evan Defilippis and Devin Hughes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-46 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson