The Porn Dude

Finally a chick goes postal

georgebushmoron

jus call me MR. President
Mar 25, 2003
3,127
2
0
55
Seattle
That should teach even the most pig headed out of you guys why guns should be banned.
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,935
0
0
what do you mean "finally"????

you been living in a monestary for a while? read some of VV or Julia's posts ...
 

Kev

New member
May 13, 2002
1,617
0
0
georgebushmoron said:
That should teach even the most pig headed out of you guys why guns should be banned.

Wrong thats why the postal workers should have had guns.

She may have gotten one shot off but after that she would have been dead.

TOUCHE
 

The Lizard King

New member
Jul 8, 2003
1,272
0
0
That should teach even the most pig headed out of you guys why guns should be banned.
Remember...guns don't kill people, postalworkers do!
 

georgebushmoron

jus call me MR. President
Mar 25, 2003
3,127
2
0
55
Seattle
Kev said:
Wrong thats why the postal workers should have had guns.

She may have gotten one shot off but after that she would have been dead.

TOUCHE
So let's say she has a semi-automatic, and she starts shooting when people aren't facing her. A semi-automatic will take out a 5 people before anyone can react. If she shoots from behind, even a non-automatic can take out quite a few. Is everyone supposed to carry guns ever at the ready in case some nutcase suddenly starts firing?

Guns are an offensive weapon, not a defensive weapon. Use some common sense.
 

butter

New member
Nov 3, 2005
33
0
0
48
Vancouver
georgebushmoron said:
. If she shoots from behind, even a non-automatic can take out quite a few.

Guns are an offensive weapon, not a defensive weapon. Use some common sense.
If she hits them with a moltov cocktail, battery acid, axe or baseball bat from behind, she can take out quite a few. In the case of the first two, death, if it comes, will be painful 100% of the time. At least bullets are somewhat humane (when compared to alternative forms of death). Thanks to the evening news most people can come up with a dozen ways to kill or maim someone that they feel has wronged them (or someone the voices tell them to off). Is trying to regulate or license all (or any) of these an effective use of tax dollars when there are so many living below the poverty line (and other equally pressing issues)?

To kill is wrong. To cause suffering is worse.

Use some common sense.
 

georgebushmoron

jus call me MR. President
Mar 25, 2003
3,127
2
0
55
Seattle
butter said:
If she hits them with a moltov cocktail, battery acid, axe or baseball bat from behind, she can take out quite a few. In the case of the first two, death, if it comes, will be painful 100% of the time. At least bullets are somewhat humane (when compared to alternative forms of death). ...
Use some common sense.
This is common sense? In the world of video games, I suppose it is.
 

American Male

Banned
Dec 18, 2004
730
0
0
68
Vancouver, most of the year
LonelyGhost said:
what do you mean "finally"????

you been living in a monestary for a while? read some of VV or Julia's posts ...


WOW, now there's a logical jump I didn't see coming! So because VV and Julia (and Stephanie for that matter, let's not leave anyone out) occasionally grace us with their opinions (mere words) from time to time, you somehow equate THAT with an ability to "go postal" with all of the implications of that contemporary phrase? Please say you were only joking, LG!
 

American Male

Banned
Dec 18, 2004
730
0
0
68
Vancouver, most of the year
Kev said:
Wrong thats why the postal workers should have had guns.

She may have gotten one shot off but after that she would have been dead.

TOUCHE

Follow this line of thinking to its conclusion. We should just give everyone a gun and that way, we can have an endless series of handgun shoot-outs on every street corner, in every bar and anyplace else people disagree with each other.

I love the smell of the Old West. So what if a few innocent by-standers get killed along the way. Couldn't be helped. Everyone's gotta die sometime, right!! Today, twenty years from now, or 50 years from now. Makes no difference, right!!!

Is it just me, or does the level of discourse on Perb seem to be getting stupider and stupider every single day!!
 

butter

New member
Nov 3, 2005
33
0
0
48
Vancouver
georgebushmoron said:
This is common sense? In the world of video games, I suppose it is.
Not common sense, just sorta sad. Trying to regulate such is not common sense either. Videogames? FOXNews.
 

niteowl

Member
Jun 29, 2004
913
1
18
Burnaby
Guns don't kill people.
Bullets don't kill people.
People kill people.

I think it's long over due for a Canadian Postal worker to kill someone.

How does a gun kill someone if it's in pieces?
Has no bullets?

How do bullets kill people if it's just sitting on a counter?
or in the carrying box?
 

Kev

New member
May 13, 2002
1,617
0
0
American Male said:
Follow this line of thinking to its conclusion. We should just give everyone a gun and that way, we can have an endless series of handgun shoot-outs on every street corner, in every bar and anyplace else people disagree with each other.
No AM thats whats wrong with to many today. They think that because someone has a gun in their possession that they will use it against someone solely on the basis that it is in their possession. And thats just not true. However criminals will, crazy people will, those who snap like this women at the post office will. None of these should be allowed guns of any kind and there should be laws that prohibit people of unsound mind against possessing them.

Just because you get into an arguement with someone doesn't mean your going to take out your gun and shoot him, just like you wouldn't pick up a butcher knife and use that. Unless your head isn't right.

This women was of unsound mind and found a means to an end. She used a gun but she could have chosen another weapon. OJ Simpson used a knife to kill Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman.

I don't like laws imposed on me because of actions committed by others. Did you see the news about the women who took her Mercedes and ran down her husband and mistress.......killing them? Should all cars be taken off the road? Of course not. But when a crime is committed with a gun...........oh my god ban them all.
 

Kev

New member
May 13, 2002
1,617
0
0
georgebushmoron said:
So let's say she has a semi-automatic, and she starts shooting when people aren't facing her. A semi-automatic will take out a 5 people before anyone can react. If she shoots from behind, even a non-automatic can take out quite a few.
Guns are an offensive weapon, not a defensive weapon. Use some common sense.
Police are to serve and protect. Their weapons are used defensively.

Ok you don't now much about guns. She had a semi-automatic.......she used a 9 mm handgun. I've never heard of a 9mm that wasn't a semi-automatic. Maybe you meant to say automatic. Those are illegal in the USA, just like in Canada.

Is everyone supposed to carry guns ever at the ready in case some nutcase suddenly starts firing?
That should depend on you not law makers.

Back in the day Americans were building bomb shelters because of fear the Russians were going to attack. Others thought bomb shelters were for the paranoid. But it was their right to build them.

There are those that study self-defence because they feel at some point (especially in this day and age) that there lives could be injeopardy. Others may feel that they are letting fear get the better of them. But it is their right.

Others who want to feel safe may want to carry a gun. That should be their right too. Assuming that they pass all courses aren't mentally unfit. etc. 30 states already have the Utah Concealed Carry Permit with more states getting on board. Washington Sate being one of them.
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,935
0
0
American Male said:
Please say you were only joking, LG!
yup ... only joking ... and if it was offensive then the mods can remove it. you can pm them and quote this message.

LG
 

Marvin

Banned
Oct 28, 2002
1,415
0
0
between her thighs
georgebushmoron said:
That should teach even the most pig headed out of you guys why guns should be banned.
georgebushmoron said:
Guns are an offensive weapon, not a defensive weapon. Use some common sense.
Kev said:
Police are to serve and protect. Their weapons are used defensively.

Ok you don't now much about guns. She had a semi-automatic.......she used a 9 mm handgun. I've never heard of a 9mm that wasn't a semi-automatic. Maybe you meant to say automatic. Those are illegal in the USA, just like in Canada.
So, your knee jerk reaction is to ban all guns because of a certain nut-case going on a shooting spree. Then is it fair to say that when a car thief steals a car and gets into a car accident injuring innocent people, we must ban all cars? I am not sure of the numbers at this moment but don't cars kill more people than guns? :confused:

Exactly what Kev said, the cops carry guns as a deterrent and for defence, not as an offensive weapon. So, I guess that is why conservation officers up north are given guns so they can shoot bears. :rolleyes:

Kev, of course he doesn't know much about guns ... his name ends with "moron". :rolleyes:
 

American Male

Banned
Dec 18, 2004
730
0
0
68
Vancouver, most of the year
sexxxygirl said:
So how about them Calgary Flames ! LOL:) :) :D I'd go postal over them anytime;)

Hey, Bouncy Girl. Canucks have been winning late. I'll bet those Calgary Flamers...opps...I mean Flames, are looking over their shoulders. Pretty scared, huh!
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts