Not a single

Fungus Gnat

Well-Known Member
fuck was given by this kid
A seven and 11-year-old boy pulled a loaded gun on an Oregon woman during an attempted carjacking and robbery outside a church parking lot, police said on Sunday.
Armed with a .22 caliber handgun, cocked and loaded, police in Portland say the described 11-year-old delinquent, seen back on the streets today, and his 7-year-old accomplice were caught while trying to flee on Saturday afternoon.
'They told me they were going to blow my brains out if I didn't give them something,' 22-year-old victim Amy Garrett recalled to KATU on Sunday while still visibly shaken.

Miss Garrett called their release ‘the scary part,’ that forced her to relive her trauma once more on Sunday.
‘And, that is the kid right there,’ she told a reporter with KATU while standing outside her family’s church during an interview.

With Miss Garrett visibly trembling, the 11-year-old appeared unscathed and easy at her side, momentarily standing beside her until her rattled nerves forced her to step away.
'I don't want to be here right now,' she later said trembling while keeping her eyes in the direction the boy had come from and eventually retreated back to.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2245712/Amy-Garrett-Portland-woman-held-gunpoint-boys-aged-7-11-attempted-carjacking.html#ixzz2Ecznpbxw
It would be funnier if the kid ran up during the interview and stabbed her with a shiv.
 

imchucky666

Well-Known Member
fuck was given by this kid

It would be funnier if the kid ran up during the interview and stabbed her with a shiv.
All I can think of is Uma Thurman in 'Kill Bill' when she takes the little kid across the ass with her Katana, and spanks the shit out of him and tells him to go home to his mother.
Kids like that really have zero respect for anything, and it shows how much the parents give a fuck as well.
 

xKuroiTaimax

Well-Known Member
TrueTrueTrue!

But guns are also way too freely available to civilians over thar too. I think you should only have one if you actually live out in the wilderness and under constant threat of bear attack.
 

rowlman

Well-Known Member
TrueTrueTrue!

But guns are also way too freely available to civilians over thar too. I think you should only have one if you actually live out in the wilderness and under constant threat of bear attack.
......only one? There's to many to chose from to just have one.....like,try only smoking one strain.
 

VLRD.Kush

Well-Known Member
TrueTrueTrue!

But guns are also way too freely available to civilians over thar too. I think you should only have one if you actually live out in the wilderness and under constant threat of bear attack.
Ummm fuck that. 2nd amendment. You can't let a few bad apples spoil the bunch.
 
2nd Amendment.

If you take away all the guns from the good guys the bad guys win.

I live near Baltimore City, MD. There are too many junkies and lowlives wondering around to not have a gun.
 

DuplicatePie

Active Member
Kids got lucky. Too bad they didn't try to rob someone who ended up just shooting them. I know that sounds harsh, but if you point a loaded gun at someone and tell them you're going to blow out their brains, you shouldn't be surprised when you end up with a ventilated cranium.
 

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
2nd Amendment.

If you take away all the guns from the good guys the bad guys win.

I live near Baltimore City, MD. There are too many junkies and lowlives wondering around to not have a gun.
We do it just fine in England, we have equally scummy areas and towns and cities. Glasgow, lol. Americans never seem to take into account the fact that it is a circle. You claim all the bad guys would win because the have all the guns, but that is only because of the abundance and ease of acquisition in the first place. In the UK it is hard and expensive to get a gun, therefore general bad guys do not have them. We survive going to the shops just fine. And bad guys also do not generally break into a house with a gun in hand because they generally know that they will not be met with a gun so there is no need. Remember, it is kind of in the bad guys interest to win, so to do so he must out-arm you. If he knows there is every chance you own a gun, of course he will have one of his own, and he will try and make sure that its bigger and badder than yours if he can, he does not really want to lose the fight.

I am not arguing either way, you have your laws, they're yours to make, buy your bad guy argument is incredibly flawed. And at the end of the day, the biggest bad guys are the government, and it seems quite clear your right to own a gun isn't doing sweet fuck all to keep them at bay, your gun is worthless against them.
 

DuplicatePie

Active Member
We do it just fine in England, we have equally scummy areas and towns and cities. Glasgow, lol. Americans never seem to take into account the fact that it is a circle. You claim all the bad guys would win because the have all the guns, but that is only because of the abundance and ease of acquisition in the first place. In the UK it is hard and expensive to get a gun, therefore general bad guys do not have them. We survive going to the shops just fine. And bad guys also do not generally break into a house with a gun in hand because they generally know that they will not be met with a gun so there is no need. Remember, it is kind of in the bad guys interest to win, so to do so he must out-arm you. If he knows there is every chance you own a gun, of course he will have one of his own, and he will try and make sure that its bigger and badder than yours if he can, he does not really want to lose the fight.

I am not arguing either way, you have your laws, they're yours to make, buy your bad guy argument is incredibly flawed. And at the end of the day, the biggest bad guys are the government, and it seems quite clear your right to own a gun isn't doing sweet fuck all to keep them at bay, your gun is worthless against them.
That last argument you made is quite a bit of conjecture. How do you know that it isn't the vast number of guns that are owned by private American citizens that keeps the government at bay? Isn't it possible that the government could behave in an entirely different way if they knew that there was no threat of an armed populace uprising against them?
Also, that high murder rate that everyone likes to point to while grinning like a doofus, thinking they have delivered some kind of unbeatable trump card to the argument at hand, is more or less caused by certain cultures and values and not solely because of the availability of firearms.
 

MojoRison

Well-Known Member
The debate shouldn't be about the right to bear arms, but why two children feel that it is a justifiable thing to do...to commit armed robbery.
 

DuplicatePie

Active Member
The debate shouldn't be about the right to bear arms, but why two children feel that it is a justifiable thing to do...to commit armed robbery.
Exactly. That's where the "...is more or less caused by certain cultures and values ..." of my last post comes in to play.
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
When the police stop carrying guns like they do in the uk.. or our military gives up their wrapons.. that's the.date in time I'll think about handing over mine.. that is the real reason why we are allowed guns i
In case shit goes down we can fight it out with.our gvt
 

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
That last argument you made is quite a bit of conjecture. How do you know that it isn't the vast number of guns that are owned by private American citizens that keeps the government at bay? Isn't it possible that the government could behave in an entirely different way if they knew that there was no threat of an armed populace uprising against them?
Also, that high murder rate that everyone likes to point to while grinning like a doofus, thinking they have delivered some kind of unbeatable trump card to the argument at hand, is more or less caused by certain cultures and values and not solely because of the availability of firearms.
It's not conjecture at all. Be it worse or better, you are getting absolutely fucked by your government and your guns mean nothing. That's what they have ther swat teams for. Next time you see a policeman breaking the law, hold him to account with your gun and see what happens. You will be in jail or dead. Your guns don't mean squat when it comes to the government. They will kill you if you tried to defend your grow even if it was in compliance with state law.

And i did not mention any murder rates for a reason. I simply mentioned the notion of criminals with guns. They carry guns because they know you do. It is amazing how few americans understand this. Most americans seem utterly unaware that it is their law, not the criminals intentions, that have allowed them to carry guns, which in turn has forced you to own guns. Not all criminals are stupid. If they know they can rob a house carrying nothing but a baseball bat, they will not carry a gun instead, because they are aware of how drastically the punishment changes if caught. Remember, criminals are in the game to win, and if failing that, they plan to get off as lightly as possible.
 

bde0001

New Member
definetly should not try defending your grow from the police. But in general grower or not, i believe it is good to have a gun. you know. even if you dont believe in guns there is pepper spray and stun guns/tazers. those seem to work on most people.
 

imchucky666

Well-Known Member
TrueTrueTrue!

But guns are also way too freely available to civilians over thar too. I think you should only have one if you actually live out in the wilderness and under constant threat of bear attack.
Again, it all goes back to the saying, it's not the gun's fault.
 
Top