Open question: What statements would cause you to compare me with, in your description, an Egyptian River's name?

Is this the point where we start quoting things that were just said? Your line of reasoning is that of a fear-based rationale. It's no secret that you hold a conservative bent even if you are not a Republican. It's no secret that conservative minded people are more fearful of the world around them, and therefore view every option - read every change - as something that must be hemmed and hawed over a thousand times because you fear making the wrong decision.

So back on topic: your statements that a person who has accepted they are mentally ill won't accept getting rid of their guns because they will see it as a negative, as I said, is not founded in reality, therefore your statements and reasoning indicate more of an internalized fear. You're fearful of the possibility that they won't want to give up their guns. And that outcome is simply not possible given someone who has accepted that they are ill, they will automatically accept that owning guns would put themselves and those they love in danger.

Now I can really say "I've seen it all"

58 dead & 500 wounded & all that can be argued is what political party the killer belonged to?

Us Paddies are supposed to be crazy, but in this instance, we really are leprechauns compared to you Yanks :-(

Don't look at me, my Irish brother! ;-)

And even worse, he invoked a mafia conspiracy. I knew there was a reason I stopped posting.

lol, but...

...just think of all those lovely chuckles you're missing out on :-)

lol, but...

...just think of all those lovely chuckles you're missing out on :-)

Why... that was one of my childhood nicknames! Chuckles! (Ok, it was actually only the girls who had a crush on me. ;-) )

& don't forget Janne, we don't have to worry every day about an armed multi millionaire taking us out because he got tired of life.

Edit, that's what I get for trying to read 2 threads at the same time. Get the names wrong. Oops, sorry Janne.

Most of the Governments of Europe have disarmed their citizens, so when the crazies and terrorists attack with hatchets, autos, and trucks there is no one to stop them. One citizen with a concealed weapon that knows how to use it, could have saved a lot of people.

Utter nonsense!
How many in Las Vegas with concealed weapons could have stopped Paddock and saving a lot of people?
None!
22,000 people are expected to have been at the festival when the shooting began.
In addition, more than 500 people were injured by both bullets and the panic that broke out in the public.
And no one was shooting back!!!

I don't think a round from a handgun could have reached him. Also, an individual with a handgun would not have been able to pinpoint where the shooting was coming from. An old military tactic - The high ground rules the area.

Sentences 1 & 3 agree 100%.

Sentence 2, vehemently disagree. Unless No 1, having that happen, firing upwards into a busy hotel?

Sentences 1 & 3 agree 100%.

Sentence 2, vehemently disagree. Unless No 1, having that happen, firing upwards into a busy hotel?

I negatively referenced people in the crowd possessing automatic weapons, firing indiscriminately at the hotel. As the untrained would do.

"No one wants people in the crowd possessing automatic rifles."

Why do you disagree?

If that was your original sentence, that it would have been an agreement on all 3. Unfortunately...

..original sentence 2...

The only means that may have mattered was a number of persons, with automatic rifles firing at his direction, trying to suppress his threat.

Quite a difference don't you think or DO YOU disagree?

You're quite fond of providing previous posts when it suits your purpose, so WHY did you change the sentence?

Sentence 2 did not reference trained or untrained, your "amended" sentence stated untrained. Stop wriggling it does you no justice.

As many have said all along, "Politicians don't have a clue"
NRA support for restricting ‘bump stocks’ reflects impact of Las Vegas massacre
Just look at the number that had no idea that "bump stocks" existed or knew what they were.

This latest also blows away the NSA's position that "the only way to stop a bad man with a gun, is a good man with a gun"

Please note that falsely claiming that the Las Vegas mass-murderer Stephen Paddock was of one or another political alignment in order to smear those who are of that alignment (which includes many members of this forum) will be considered a violation of "No posts intended to insult" or "No posts intended to antagonize"

Some posts have had to go away because of this... I will repost part of one of them as it was a shame to lose, from CLYDE:

Paddock was not a registered Democrat or Republican and was not registered to vote in Florida, where he had a permanent home address.

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/10/03/the-las-vegas-shooter-stephen-paddock-separating-fact-from-fiction/

The Blaze is pretty slanted at times, so kudos to them for their accuracy. And boo to those who are using this tragedy to malign others.

Thank you.

---

Please note that falsely claiming that the Las Vegas mass-murderer Stephen Paddock was of one or another political alignment in order to smear that alignment will be considered a violation of "No posts intended to insult" or "No posts intended to antagonize".

Would this also apply to posts that claim some poster is of one or another political alignment in order to smear that alignment or paint that poster with negative connotations?

Unsure which specific(s) you mean... all I can suggest as always is to report any post with an intended insult (which that scenario you describe could very well be.)

---

.."the only way to stop a bad man with a gun, is a good man with a gun".

But there's never a "good man" around because they're running for their lives just like everyone else.

So that statement is just plain utter B.S. (as always) and those that use it are just brainwashed idiots who don't have a clue to start with.

No cheers.

Please note that falsely claiming that the Las Vegas mass-murderer Stephen Paddock was of one or another political alignment in order to smear that alignment will be considered a violation of "No posts intended to insult" or "No posts intended to antagonize".

Would this also apply to posts that claim some poster is of one or another political alignment in order to smear that alignment or paint that poster with negative connotations?

Is attacking Republicans or Trump supporters included?

If so then attacking left/right/democrats/never trumps/liberals/fascists/Nazis/KKK/Maoists ... would be included.

.."the only way to stop a bad man with a gun, is a good man with a gun".

But there's never a "good man" around because they're running for their lives just like everyone else.

So that statement is just plain utter B.S. (as always) and those that use it are just brainwashed idiots who don't have a clue to start with.

No cheers.

Heroes Of The Vegas Massacre

https://www.bing.com/search?q=heroes+of+the+vegas+massacre&FORM=AWRE

---

...

.."the only way to stop a bad man with a gun, is a good man with a gun".

But there's never a "good man" around because they're running for their lives just like everyone else.

So that statement is just plain utter B.S. (as always) and those that use it are just brainwashed idiots who don't have a clue to start with.

No cheers.

Just to fill in a bit more about that statement, so that you know who to send your comments too. It was by NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre to congress just after Sandy Hook in December 2012.

.."the only way to stop a bad man with a gun, is a good man with a gun".

But there's never a "good man" around because they're running for their lives just like everyone else.

So that statement is just plain utter B.S. (as always) and those that use it are just brainwashed idiots who don't have a clue to start with.

No cheers.

Just to fill in a bit more about that statement, so that you know who to send your comments too. It was by NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre to congress just after Sandy Hook in December 2012.

And many many more idiots have repeated that same stupid fictional statement ever since.

Cheers.